G8: The Devil Is In The Details - Where Are The Angels Hiding?
by greenz.jp, Tokyo, Japan on 07.10.08
Over at greenz.jp we just finished an event tonight with invited guests speaking about their experiences from Hokkaido and the G8 Summit. Clearly, many young participants felt left out of the picture, unless you were a member of one of the NGOs and maybe even got to actually shake hands with a G8 leader. One thought: Susan George, long-time activist and author asked here in Tokyo last week: "How many people have actually read a G8 Summit Document?"
Good question.
This year, the documents are all available on the official Hokkaido Toyako Summit website. Do have a look. What do the dear leaders of the world's largest economies think about nuclear power, climate change - they even have comments about illegal logging, for whatever it is worth.
I was struck by the comments on the global food crisis, called the G8 Leaders Statement on Global Food Security. Note how they think "sustainable use" means go ahead and grab whatever is there to use. More below the fold: organic farming is not even mentioned!
Sorry for the long quote below, but I hope you will read and comment.
7. We fully recognize the need for a wide range of mid- to long-term measures to tackle the issue of food security and poverty, inter alia, the importance of stimulating world food production and increasing investment in agriculture. To this end, we will:1. (a) reverse the overall decline of aid and investment in the agricultural sector, and to achieve significant increases in support of developing country initiatives, including – in Africa – through full and effective implementation of the Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP);
2. (b) support CAADP’s goal of 6.2% annual growth in agricultural productivity, and work toward the goal of doubling production of key food staples in African countries meeting CAADP criteria in five to ten years in a sustainable manner, with particular emphases on fostering smallholder agriculture and inclusive rural growth;
3. (c) promote agricultural research and development, and the training of a new generation of developing country scientists and experts focusing on the dissemination of improved, locally adapted and sustainable farming technologies, in particular via the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), and through partnerships such as the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA);
4. (d) support improvement of infrastructure, including irrigation, transportation, supply chain, storage and distribution systems and quality control;
5. (e) assist in the development of food security early warning systems;
6. (f) encourage the efforts of international financial institutions including regional development banks and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); in this regard, we particularly welcome the World Bank’s recent announcement of a new US$ 1.2 billion rapid financing facility to address immediate needs, and the work of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to address the needs of food-importing countries facing balance of payments difficulties, including through the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility and the review of the Exogenous Shocks Facility;
7. (g) accelerate research and development and increase access to new agricultural technologies to boost agricultural production; we will promote science-based risk analysis including on the contribution of seed varieties developed through biotechnology;
8. (h) support country-led development strategies in adapting to the impact of climate change, combating desertification, and promoting conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, while intensifying our efforts to address climate change;
9. (i) ensure the compatibility of policies for the sustainable production and use of biofuels with food security and accelerate development and commercialization of sustainable second-generation biofuels from non-food plant materials and inedible biomass; in this regard, we will work together with other relevant stakeholders to develop science-based benchmarks and indicators for biofuel production and use;
10. (j) promote good governance in developing countries with particular emphasis on their food security and market policies; and
11. (k) mainstream food security objectives into the development policies of donors and recipient countries, reaffirming our common commitment to the principles of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.
"...the contribution of seed varieties developed through biotechnology" is not what most farmers in countries dealing with real-world issues like water shortages, peak oil and loss of biodiversity think will help anyone avoid starvation.
Note that Nerica Rice, a variety that is not a GMO (genetically modified organism), but developed through conventional crossbreeding of native African rice varieties since 1991, gets special mention on the G8 Kids Site: Improving Africa's Rice Crop. I think treehuggers can agree that Nerica Rice is probably a great idea, while GMO and biotech crops are just creating more problems than they are designed to solve.
Written by Martin Frid at greenz.jp
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- More Companies Support Green Tax Than Oppose It In Japan
- Geography of Sakhalin Island
- Wild Food: Seven Herbs To Celebrate The Return Of Green
- Geography of The Kuril Islands
Waste of Energy Dept: More Silly Appliances
|
Compost Conundrum, Part II: Backyard Box, Indoor Bin, Or A Can-O-Worms?
|
Hi,
I'll just make two relatively quick comments - in the end they both boil down to the same thing...
1) On the big political stage, we're still very firmly entrenched in growthism, aren't we? All the statements above about food security are very applaudable, but without caveats on population growth it won't be long before we're back in the same place again. "Population growth must happen for economic growth to take place, right?" is the thing they are thinking, but definitely not saying. Right? Another example is global warming/climate change. A lot of haggling over numbers, but how about just arranging things so that in 2025, or whenever you want it - the sooner the better - we reach a target (say 50% reductions) where everyone in the world has the same CO2 emmission? Industrial countries come down, developing, newly industrializing countries come up, but the catch will be that everyone will be entitled to the same CO2 emission AT CURRENT POPULATION LEVEL, so if the population rises, each individual's emission entitlement will go down by the proportion that the population has increased. Vice versa for reducing populations.
2) This bit is also interesting: "ensure the compatibility of policies for the sustainable production and use of biofuels with food security and accelerate development and commercialization of sustainable second-generation biofuels from non-food plant materials and inedible biomass." Tut-tut, haven't biofuels (I think we are talking mainly about ethanol here) gotten themselves a bad name recently! Responsible for world hunger, AND with the prices of the raw materials and process energy now going through the roof, the nice new ethanol plants are beginning to shut down because they are not economically viable. The important part in the above statement is "second-generation biofuels from non-food plant materials and inedible biomass." Oh, so we are going to use the inedible biomass to make ethanol. This will mean using chemical fertilizers (only?) to maintain soil fertility, which will result in a further destruction of our most crucial resource base, the soil. The idea of "non-food" plant materials is that we still use materials from food plants grown on the best cropland. Well, we don't have to do any of this. Energy crops can be grown on marginal land, in sewerage swamps, as one part of a viable rotation, gathered from the sea (seaweed and so on), and do not have to be one of maize (corn), soybeans or sugar cane. The details are in David Blume's book "Alcohol can be a gas" - a huge but very interesting book that the growthist politicians and their elite friends are not very happy about. Meanwhile, most people are now under the impression that 'biofuels are a bad idea' and therefore we have no option but to rely on oil and natural gas. Get it?
Yes, and I want to add that another catch to the biofuels thing is that of course all these corn and soy crops that we will get from the "development and commercialization of sustainable second-generation biofuels from non-food plant materials" will be GMOs, so effectively what we are being told is that there will be no weaning the population off oil and onto ethanol UNTIL the multinational corporations can force everyone to accept GMO food BECAUSE "we need it for the fuel"!!! Ethanol is much more "democratic" because the crops can be grown (organically!) and the ethanol distilled on a small scale, by an individual if you want to do it, so it decentralizes energy sources and undermines the power of the multinational biotech and oil companies to control people.
So the pleasant-sounding G8 Statement on the global fuel crisis looks to me more like an agenda for the introduction of a new feudal age with "us" as the serfs.
Ban GMOs.
WTF were they thinking?
I'm starting my own garden soon. To hell with this shitte.
XVX for life, R.A.S.H. 'til death.
I think we all know that G8 is great for producing hot air but not much else.
Hi weee,
Yes, I think that's exactly what they want you to think. But I also think that if you read the first two comments by Tonbo and myself you will see that it is not hot air, but a thinly veiled agenda that says, "All the problems that we say we are going to work on, that the media have got you all worried and worked up about, well, we're going to use them to put in place a system that controls you and enslaves you for the benefit of the multinational corporations and the 'elite'." This is hot air?
If you have time, please read this BBC news story:
Brown pledge to tackle stabbings
The youth of the G8 industrialized countries carry knives and stab each other in the street. (It's happening in Japan, too.) Brown says he will introduce a "new approach to youth crime prevention" - more control. A well-known headmaster in a school in London says, "We live in a greedy culture, we are rude to each other in the street. Children follow that." I think they are both almost completely wrong. I think it has much more to do with a crippling and overwhelming sense of frustration with living in a society where real life choices are pitifully few. If you don't have a life to live, why should anyone else? And what kind of a life will we have to live if the wonderful G8 leaders and their elite and corporatist friends push their agenda through? If may look like hot air, but I definitely do not think it is.
Thanks for the comments. I agree with Tonbo that we need to get away from relying on oil asap. Biofuels would be a solution if we also had a huge push (with G8 countries taking the lead) to reduce fuel consumption. Imagine if THAT had been the main message from the Toyako Summit: "Stop waisting oil!"
Controlling the food we all need for survival on this planet is a serious issue - and Monsanto is clearly on target to do just that, with patents on seed, research into "Terminator" seed control technology and so on. As for "fostering smallholder agriculture and inclusive rural growth" as stated by the G8 above - how are they going to do this in Africa, when they have so far failed to do it in Europe and North America?
Starting one's own garden is just about the most rebellious thing one can do these days!