THE LOITA FOREST CONUNDRUM

[NAIROBI 10TH NOVEMBER 2008, By John Mbaria] A PROJECT seeking to complement conservation efforts in the Loita forest of Kenya has been rejected by the Maasai Community along the Kenya / Tanzania border.

The project by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) covers the 330 sq km upland forest lying between the Nguruman / Magadi escarpment and the Maasai Mara National Reserve. Straddling the Kenya / Tanzania border, the largely Virgin forest has a wide diversity of vegetation and offers the local people not only timber and medical herbs, but also sites that continue to be of cultural and spiritual value to them.

According to a paper by IUCN, the Loita / Purko Naimina Enkiyio Forest Integrated Conservation and Development Project, it seeks to assist the community “to maintain the biodiversity and environmental values of the forest.’

Besides the clash of cultures that is behind the Loita Maasai’s opposition to a project that is meant to conserve the Naimina Enkiyio forest, the lion’s share of the Kshs200 million ($2.56 million ) EU grant for the project will go to salaries and allowances of IUCN workers and the purchase and maintenance of project vehicles and office equipment.

IUCN’s regional programme coordinator for East Africa, Dr Geoffrey Howard, defended the budget, saying that it was not “secretive” and had been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the main financier, the European Commission. He said IUCN had initially wanted to second two technical assistants to the project but changed it’s mind later. “In any case , the expatriate will be bringing his international experience to the project.”

As stated in it’s brief, the project is meant to complement the community’s efforts to conserve and manage forest.

But a number of the local people have come out to oppose it in a running row that observers say pits modern conservation science - as practised by IUCN - against the Loita people’s desire to maintain ownership and traditional management of the forest .

“This is a forest we have always fallen back on in times of calamity and for medicine “, said Vincent Ntekerei, a former lecturer at Narok Teachers Training College.

“We do not know IUCN’s real intention”, said another David Ole Kashu , who said that having managed the forest for hundreds of years the Loita are now opposed to what they feel is “outsider interference “.

Mr. Kashu and Mr Ntekerei belong to a group of largely educated and articulate local residents who, operating under the auspices of Concerned Citizens of Loita (CCL) - a loosely-organised body - have raised issue with the project.

During a public meeting held a month ago, speakers expressed the view that the locals should continue managing the forest “like we have always done for generations “.

They opposed IUCN’s proposed draft management plan for the forest. They said IUCN had participated in a project that ended up displacing communities around Ngorongoro in Tanzania in order to create a wildlife sanctuary there.

Dr Howard said, “It is true IUCN was involved in the development of a management plan in Ngorongoro in 1997 / 98.” But he said that the project, which was managed by the Ngorongoro Management Authority became problematic after the donor reduced project time, “which led to one group in the relevant community not being consulted”.

Consequently, said Dr Howard , the disgruntled group , “with the help of a foreign organisation,” produced a video and a report that “substantially damaged IUCN’s image”.

The CCL group has called for the suspension of the project despite the Narok District Development Committee giving it a go a head.

The survival of the forest at time when most other forest in Kenya have largely lost their tree cover is attributed to the traditional intervention that the community has adopted.

Besides hosting sites sacred to most members of the Maasai community in Kenya and Tanzania, the Loita area is the seat of the chief Laibon , Mokombo Ole Simel, who is said to be a direct descendant of the famous Laibon Mbatian. Ole Simel, who is reputed to possess mystical powers, presides over social events in the area.

The institution of the Laibon, says a UNESCO publication entitled “Ethnobotany of the Loita Maasai; Towards Community management of the Forest of the Lost Child” is central to the conservation of Loita Forest .

But there is growing concern that following changes in lifestyle within the community, the recent introduction of agriculture and external pressure, the forest is increasingly under threat.

“If there is no well-organised management system, then it will not be long before massive plunder of the forest begins”, said Dr Howard. IUCN says that already, the 40,000-strong community has increased it’s harvest of the forest, lead to a scarcity of tree species that the community uses for building and fencing.

This development is more is more prominent at the forest edges and is forcing community members to go deeper into the forest. [ENDS]

THE GMO DEBATE HEATS UP NAIROBI

[By John Mbaria in Nairobi] The grand scheme to introduce genetically modified foods into Kenya seemed to shift into top gear after the Ministry of Agriculture launched a campaign last month to make the country appreciate them.
First, Minister for Agriculture, William Ruto, who has on several occasions publicly expressed his support for the introduction of GM foods into the country, launched the National Biotechnology Awareness Strategy last month. According to a statement Ruto sent to the press, the strategy was aimed at offering Kenyans "accurate and reliable information and knowledge" about such branches of biotechnology as tissue culture, molecular breeding and genetic modification.
"This will enable Kenyans to make informed decisions and be involved in determining the pace of adoption of biotechnology in the country," he said.
However, Ruto went ahead to state that Kenya will embrace GMOs, making it appear the government had launched the awareness campaign merely to state its pro-GMO stance. This has led to fresh fears that the government has irrevocably decided on introduction, cultivation and commercialization of GMOs in the country. Ruto had earlier, on August 14, said he has never come across any proof that GMOs are risky to human health and stated that it was the height of irony for people to continue opposing GMO proliferation when the country has been importing food from countries that grow genetically modified foods. Indeed, the Assistant Minister for Basic Education, Prof Ayiecho Olweny, confessed last month that the government has been importing GM-foods. He was addressing a luncheon organised in Nairobi by key pro-GM lobbyists under the auspices of the Open Forum on Agricultural Biotechnology in Africa.
"All this noise about GMOs... is politics (and) politics is more dangerous than science... We are eating some of them already," he said.
Prof Olweny also revealed that he and fellow legislators had worked hard to defeat a Bill brought to parliament last year by a former Saboti MP, Davis Nakitare, which had asked the government to ban GMOs in Kenya. The Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology has also been preparing to take back to parliament a Bill that was heavily criticised last year for failing to address the concerns of farmers and consumers and for merely seeking to create the necessary legal framework for the introduction of GMOs in Kenya.
It been established from sources at parliament that the revised Bill was recently presented before two House committees -- Agriculture, Land and Natural Resources as well as the one on Education, Science and Technology.
"The new Bill is termed the Biosafety Bill 2008. But much of its contents closely resemble those in the Biosafety Bill 2007," said Wanjiru Kamau, the spokesperson of the Kenya Biodiversity Coalition (KBioC). She said that apart from a few clauses that have been changed following an outcry by KBioC, the rest of the contents "are intact."
Other critics had charged that the very process of preparing the Bill was shrouded in secrecy, with a leading environmental lawyer Maurice Makoloo who said last year; "There has been so much secrecy that most stakeholders do not even know where they can get a copy of the Bill."
Interestingly, by mid this year, the farmers' and consumers' lobby, aided by animal welfare organisations and groups that champion organic farming had drafted their version of the bill and presented it to parliament as a private member's Bill. This is the Biotechnology and Biosafety Bill 2008, introduced into parliament by the only Mazingira-Green Party MP, Silas Muriuki, who is also a farmer in Meru.
According to the Hansard record, Mr Muriuki had filed the notice in parliament on June 26. But a day later, the government -- through Dr Sally Kosgey, the Minister for Higher Education, Science and Technology -- published Biosafety Bill 2008 under Kenya Gazette Supplement No. 48 (Bills No. 15). There are now suspicions that the government is determined to push through an unpopular Bill and that the ministers' demonstrated support for introduction of GMOs is a prelude to full introduction of the technology.
"They want to do it by force, the so-called national awareness strategy is a mere gimmick," said Josphat Ngonyo of the Africa Network for Animal Welfare. Mr Ngonyo said KBioC, of which he is a member, has attempted to get the agriculture minister to listen to its side of the GMO story to no avail. KBioC is anumbrella body representing over 50 farmers' groups, religious organisations, consumer organisations and NGOs.
Other developments also seem to point to the fact that the country could be gearing up for the full introduction of these foods. For instance, during a field day staged by the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) at its Kiboko field station on September 5, it emerged that the Insect Resistant Maize for Africa Project (IRMA), KARI and the International Maize and Wheat Centre (CIMMYT) are preparing to release genetically modified maize to Kenyan farmers between 2010 and 2011.
According to posters displayed during the field day, the genetically modified maize being tested will be "pre-released" to farmers in 2010 and will later be released "on a large-scale" in 2011.
This writer saw rows of maize plants in the KARI farm that were clearly labelled GMO and received confirmation from the head of KARI's Biotechnology Centre, Dr Simon Gichuki, that besides Kiboko, KARI is testing GM crops in Alupe, Busia, Kabete and Mwea.
Located in Kibwezi district some four-hours drive along Nairobi-Mombasa highway, Kiboko is part of KARI's overall network of 22 research stations. According to the posters displayed by KARI, much of the core funding for the IRMA project comes from Syngenta Foundation, Melinda & Bill Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation. The project focuses on the development of maize varieties that are alleged to have an in-built ability to protect themselves from pests without any chemical being sprayed.
This is the bt-maize, which the project terms "a type of genetically modified maize that uses a gene from common soil bacterium (Bacillus thurigiensis), that produces insecticidal proteins that protects the plant against stem borers.
"Here is evidence that all the activities and the announcements by top government officials, some scientists and pro-GMO lobby are to prepare the country for this eventuality in 2010," said Mr Ngonyo.
But one of the leading proponents of genetic engineering in Kenya, Dr Florence Wambugu, told The EastAfrican that those opposed to the introduction and proliferation of GMOs in Africa are profiteers and fearmongers.
"There are those who get business from fearmongering," she said. She also accused Greenpeace International of offering false information by claiming that some of the maize seeds grown in Kenya are contaminated by GM-materials.
This drew the ire of a Greenpeace official who accused Dr Wambugu of employing "scare tactics" in campaigning for GMOs in Africa.
"The genetic engineering industry, and their spokesperson for Africa, Florence Wambugu, must be really desperate if they are now resorting to lies, and ridiculous ones... Greenpeace never ever endangered the environment, the life of farmers and the health of consumers by putting a single genetically engineered seed into any soil anywhere in the world, and whoever suggests the opposite is completely out of touch with reality," said Jan Van Aken of Greenpeace's Sustainable Agriculture.
What is interesting is that even though she denied that Monsanto ever funded her in her pro-GMO campaign, Dr Wambugu nevertheless admitted that she gets money from such bodies as the United States Development Agency (USAid), Rockefeller Foundation, Dupont and CropLife International. The latter is an organization represented in 91 countries whose members include the global who's-who of the genetic engineering industry -- BASF, Bayer CropScience, Dow Agrosciences, Dupont, FMC, Monsanto, Sumitomo and Syngenta. Dr Wambugu is the founder of Africa Harvest, which campaigns for GMOs in Africa.
With all this going on, it seems it is only a matter of time before Kenya joins South Africa in growing and commercialising GMOs. The trouble is that Kenya's horticultural exports to the European Union (EU), particularly baby corn, stand to be affected. Kenya and Zambia are the main exporters of fresh baby corn to the EU, with much of the product being consumed in Britain.
Some of the baby corn sold in British supermarkets is grown by small-scale farmers in Kibwezi under irrigation.
What is most interesting is that the Kenya government recognizes the significant role played by the country's horticultural exports. For instance, a month after coming out in the open to support the proliferation of GMOs, Ruto himself promised flower growers that the country will start branding its horticulture, tea and coffee exports to the EU.[ENDS]

“LONG JOHN SILVER” ALIVE IN THE INDIAN OCEAN

[VICTORIA 3/OCT/08 © A POSITIVE OUTCOMES COMMENT] Just when the world was almost forgetting the captive tales of yore that romanticized the villainy of “Captain Blackbeard”, “Long John Silver” and the happy-go-lucky “Captain Jack Sparrow” they have resurrected in the Western Indian Ocean shelf.
This time around they are not accompanied by a parrot aptly named “Captain Flint” chanting “pieces of eight”, neither are they flying the dreaded “Jolly Roger” flag. They are also not merry drinking from endless streams of kegs and vats of rum and other rot-gut liquor at their success of pillaging ill-gotten wealth through sheer bravado of cutlasses and muskets. And they are not donning eye-patches nor sporting wooden legs either.
As times change we change with them too.
Long John Silver and his comrades are now confined to history and more precisely teenage hood fancies. But there are ‘new kids on the block’ who seem eager to replace Silver and his ilk. Somali Pirates.
The rapid deterioration of Somali into lawlessness with the ‘failed state’ tag has given rise to new notions. On the one count Somali was associated with the augmentation of Islamic militancy which military watchers associate with terrorism. The emergence of piracy from the conflict cauldron that is Mogadishu was not predicted. When they ventured into the infamy of piracy, everyone dismissed them as a joke and acted as if they were gadflies and inconsequential.
Initially Somali was seen as a terrorist haven; lately that image seems to be paving way to piracy. But are terrorism and piracy related?
Writing in Legal Affairs, Douglas R. Burgess Jr. draws parallels between piracy and terrorism: “At first glance, the correlation between piracy and terrorism seems a stretch. Yet much of the basis of this skepticism can be traced to romantic and inaccurate notions about piracy. An examination of the actual history of the crime reveals startling, even astonishing, parallels to contemporary international terrorism. Viewed in its proper historical context, piracy emerges as a clear and powerful precedent.”
The “Long John Silver” antics currently being employed by Somali sea bandits are not comforting news to Small Island Developing states like Comoros, Seychelles and others. Looked at from a larger context, the gnawing threat of piracy, its correlation to terrorism and even possibly mercenary activities call for a rethink of how the world views the Horn of Africa’ and the Western Indian ocean shelf. In the last one month piracy in the Indian Ocean however, has made headlines and nudged the superpowers to rethink maritime security and the protocols governing international waters.
A decade ago, the Asian shipping lines held the top spot in piracy and related ship attacks. The Strait of Malacca which adjoins, Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia was a pirate’s haven ten years ago.
The mantle is now held by Somalis. The Somalis this week pushed piracy to new levels after hijacking a Ukrainian (read Russian) ship destined to Mombasa City (Kenya’s coastal capital). Unlike other pirates, the Somali pirates are debunking the age-old time honored tactics of piracy by setting precedents. According to the Piracy Reporting Centre (PRC) a Malaysian based outfit that monitors piracy, African waters now lead in piracy accounting for 56% of all piracy related activities.
By hijacking the MV-Faina which throughout its voyage has been flying the Belize flag the Somali “jolly roger flyers” have made world news thanks to the nature of the booty aboard the ship. MV-Faina is a precious arsenal and small wonder the pirates are unwittingly playing to the world media, demanding a hefty $35 million ransom (they have since reduced to $20 million) before releasing the cargo. Originally, the ‘precious cargo’ of some 35 T-75 Russian military tanks and an unspecified amount of artillery which has raised red flags in Washington, Moscow, Paris, London and Brussels respectively, not to mention sending shivers in Nairobi, Mogadishu and the entire East and central Africa was allegedly destined for Kenya. The spin wags are now saying the cache of weapons was not destined to Nairobi, but to Southern Sudan. Is this the reason why the pirates are dancing to the world media? Just listen to this.
According to Andrew Mwangura of the East African Seafarers Assistance Program the military hardware is destined for Southern Sudan.
"One of the cargo arrived at the port of Mombasa in October last year, two in February this year. The seized load of 33 Russian-built T-72 tanks and some ammunition was the fourth cargo with military equipment for southern Sudan," says Mwangura who hastens to add that the pirates have documented proof authenticating such a claim. Mwangura’s claims are supported by Nathan Christensen a US Navy spokesman in charge of the US Fifth Fleet based in Bahrain.
The Kenya government knowing fully well the implications of such allegations has rebutted the claims. This is because a UN arms embargo on Sudan is still in force. Right from the time when the drama played out, Nairobi claimed ownership of the military hardware.
They say there is no honour among thieves, well the Somali buccaneers seem to be doing the exact opposite as if their action is an ‘honourable act’. And this is what makes the entire scenario somewhat curious. One would expect that after hijacking the MV-Faina with its booty, the pirates would have ‘disappeared’ with the cargo and auction it as usual in their black markets before attracting undue attention. But this is not the case. If anything the pirates fully aware of satellite imagery and GIS mapping techniques are using their modern day “Captain Flint” [Long John Silver’s parrot] to shout a “pieces of eight” (old Spanish coins much loved by pirates) for the world to ‘hear them out’.
But wait a minute who said piracy is a dishonorable profession? Its not and the Somali Jolly Roger standard bearers seem to have their history right. In her treatise “Piracy of Yore versus Piracy Today” Cindy Vallar notes: “Piracy thrives when three requirements are met: A place to prowl where the rewards are great; an area where the risk of detection is slight and a safe haven.” The Somali brigands perfectly fit this description.
I guess they also know pretty well that Francis Drake and Walter Raleigh were knighted for buccaneering Spanish ships and wrecking havoc on several Spanish coastal cities. In other words in the 16th century courtesy of the “letters of marque” proffered by Queen Elizabeth pirates acted as appendages of the Royal Navy. And they were knighted for flying the Jolly Roger insignia high and enriching the ‘House of Windsor’ while amassing some fortune for themselves. The Somali pirates know that piracy is a time honoured profession used by legitimate governments to fight secret illegitimate wars. And it is with these in mind that the events surrounding the saga of MV-Faina should be viewed with.
There is much more to it than sheer Captain Jack Sparrow-inspired histrionics and Long John Silver’s audacity. The undercurrents are not the ransom money. If anything the pirates are playing some hard ball politics and sending some overt messages. The question should be who has given them the “letter of Marque”? [ENDS]

ORGANISED CRIME: THREAT TO AFRICAN WILDLIFE

[NAIROBI, 26/SEPT/2008 © A POSITIVE OUTCOMES FEATURE]International criminal rings have fueled the decimation of much treasured wildlife species in the vast continent of Africa.
A plethora of matchless Faunal and Floral species has not been spared. Elephants, rhinos, apes, turtles, chameleons, tortoises, African Gray Parrots, eagles, cranes and the illegal harvesting and plunder of species like Aloes, cacti, orchids, East African Sandalwood (sandali) and Prunus Africana (Mweri) among others have been the bane of conservationists in the continent. Unscrupulous wildlife traders in western capitals are making obscene black market profits from the sale of the continent’s irreplaceable heritage.
Dee Cook, Martin Roberts and Jason Lowther of the University of Wolverhampton have authored a damning report “The International Wildlife Trade and Organised Crime” which shows how organised criminal networks - Russian Mafia, Asian Triad Gang and the Medellin cartel - are turning their tentacles into wildlife crime, thanks to the lucrative profits. Today wildlife crime is said to be third after narcotics and arms trafficking, and the unique African wildlife is playing a pivotal role in this. According to the dossier, wildlife smuggling is done through, concealment; customs misdeclaration; permit fraud; laundering through export; diplomatic baggage and postal routes.
“Wildlife crime is rampant in many countries. International trafficking in endangered species is thought to be the third largest contraband business in terms of the cash value after the trade in narcotics and arms. High rewards and low risks of detection and punishment have made the illegal wildlife trade attractive to the criminals. There is increasing evidence of the involvement of serious and organized criminal syndicates in illegal wildlife trade. The number and frequency in interceptions of ivory and other valuable specimens from Africa such as reptiles, birds, live animals and plants is an indication.” Says Emily Kisamo, director of the Lusaka Agreement Task Force (LATF).
LATF is a multinational law enforcement agency established under the ‘Lusaka Agreement on Co-operative Enforcement Operations Directed at Illegal Trade in Wild Fauna and Flora’. The Task Force is the only one of its kind, as it is an Agency borne out of a Multilateral Environmental Agreement, which unlike others has enforcement powers to fight against illegal wildlife trade. It commenced its operations in June 1999. Its member countries consist of Congo (Brazzaville), Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Lesotho. Three other countries - South Africa, Ethiopia and Swaziland - are signatories to LATF. Several other African countries are showing keen interest in joining the Task Force.
In its eight years of existence LATF which is based in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi has become a searing thorn in the flesh of international wildlife smugglers. Ever since it was established, LATF has had a continuous string of successes in tracking down wildlife criminals and bursting their illegal operations whilst obliterating long-established illegitimate floral and faunal trade networks in Africa’s porous borders and even across the globe.
“In Africa, evidence on the organised levels of the illegal trade shows at least four broad areas of serious activity. Illegal timber trade; Wild animal trophy trafficking mostly ivory, rhino horns, skins; illegal trade in live and dead specimens for specialist collectors of butterflies, birds, reptiles, amphibians, primates, plants, eggs, and wildlife derivatives.” Says Kisamo who hails from Tanzania.
The main objective of the Lusaka Agreement is pegged on assisting member states to trim down and ultimately eliminate illicit trade in wild fauna and flora. The Task Force is composed of national law enforcement officers seconded from member states, to coordinate cross-border law enforcement operations and facilitate the development of new techniques to fight prohibited wildlife trade. The Task Force is also well represented at Interpol’s Wildlife Crime Sub Group.
According to Kisamo, Ivory is frequently encountered in banned trade and is a major reason for poaching of the African elephant, whose numbers are dwindling.
“The ivory contraband transits through border entry and exit points where capacities of law enforcement agencies are inadequate. Absence of scanning and other detection equipment at some of these points has exacerbated the situation. Criminal trafficking of ivory continues unabated in many parts of Africa despite the international ban on ivory trade by the Convention of the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).” Says Kisamo.
LATF reveals that readily available local and international markets have contributed largely to the high demand for elephant ivory. A significant number of seizures have been recorded recently thanks to LATF’s under-cover operations in wildlife crime detection and adoption of new methods to fight this vice.
So far it has been established that the wildlife trade racket operates due to international demand.
“International demand provides incentives to middlemen who in turn engage local communities to undertake poaching. There are different black markets pricing levels for the specimen at each stage. For instance a poacher’s selling price to a middleman for elephant ivory in September 2006 was between $5-10 per Kg in Kenya and the middleman would then sell at $19 –22 per Kg. In the past, the international market price has fetched up to more than US$ 100 per kg. Foreigners provide the incentive. Locals’ come in at the starting level of obtaining specimens and are as expected paid a nominal amount. These specimens are usually sold to another tycoon who will arrange to export them from the country to outside Africa.” Kisamo reveals.
According to Interpol records in the period 2002 to 2004 alone, more than 18,000 Kg of ivory were intercepted in various parts of the world. Most of the elephant ivory is collected from established wildlife protected Areas in remote areas and concealed in commodities like timber, charcoal, fish, and farm produce (banana, maize and rice) during transportation, to avoid detection, by law enforcement agencies.
“Being the only regional enforcement agency, we are not sitting on our laurels as we still face a number of challenges in our ultimate work of eliminating and dismantling wildlife crime syndicates and ensuring that the inimitable naturally endowed wildlife fortunes of the African continent are protected for posterity.” Says Kisamo. [ENDS]

WHO CARES ABOUT RENEWABLES?

[NAIROBI 25TH/SEPT/2008 © A POSITIVE OUTCOME FEATURE]For industrialization to take place, which is the main agenda of many African countries, energy is a key component. It is for this reason that Africa must rethink her energy priorities. And, Kenya is no exception.
Following the oil shock of 1970, the slow progress of both the Rural Electrification Plan of 1973 and the Rural Electrification Master Plan of 1994 a boom in solar power development and other energy alternatives took root in the country. A survey by the World Energy Council (WEC) notes on Kenya
“With a very large percentage of the urban population and almost all of the rural population having no access to a public supply of electricity, solar-based power could play a significant role in redressing the energy supply-demand picture, raising living standards and stimulating the economy. “
But in as much as it is a known fact that solar power is a critical component in meeting the country’s energy needs, there is little government effort to support such an undertaking. Instead much of the government resources are still channeled to hydro-electric power generation.
The seemingly ‘all-inclusive’ Grand Coalition administration seems ill-prepared to rethink the country’s energy strategy. Kenya’s three main sources of energy are electricity, wood fuel, petroleum and renewable energy. Of these renewables are least exploited and seriously under funded. In the recently launched Kenya Vision 2030, there is no mention of solar power. The country’s power generating company KENGEN also speaks little of solar power. Instead much of the country’s efforts are concentrated on hydro-electric power even though credible research findings illustrate and hype on the need to shift from the hydro/fossil-powered electricity paradigm in favour of geothermal, solar, wind and bagasse (sugar cane waste, which is capable of producing power. Kenya produces one million tonnes of these each year which goes to waste).
The benefits of exploiting solar and other renewables are legion. There are plenty of reasons for this.
“Renewables” not only hold the key for transforming the country’s back waters but they stand to give rural areas in Kenya a new lease of life and bring them at par with other areas. According to the World Energy Council (WEC) “renewable is the term used for forms of energy that can be regenerated, or renewed, in a relatively short amount of time. The regeneration process may be continuous and immediate, as in the case of direct solar radiation, or it may take some hours, months or years. This is the case of wind energy (generated by the uneven heating of air masses), hydro energy (related to the sun-powered cycle of water evaporation and rain), biomass energy (stored in plants through photosynthesis), and the energy contained in marine currents.”
Solar, wind and other renewables are the best sources of energy for Africa’s rural households, however the exploitation of these resources has been wanting not just in Kenya but in the continent as a whole.
That Kenya is a hotspot for wind and solar energy is not in doubt.
Kenya leads the rest of the continent in terms of her exploitation of both geothermal and solar power, but much more still needs to be done.
Presently, the continent is gearing itself to harness the benefits accruing from Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), and the issue of energy is crucial as most ICT gadgets rely heavily on power.
African governments must enable the citizenry access these solar panels by reducing the tax tariffs imposed on such materials; offer incentives; and provide subsidies alike to enable more people access power.
After all, energy from renewables provides clean, cheap, reliable, safe power to remote areas, and provides a healthy alternative to fossil fuels.
ENDS

OF FOOD SECURITY, HUNGER AND PASTORALISM

A POSITIVEOUTCOMES FEATURE© June 2007
"The State Parties to the present covenant, recognizing the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger, shall take, individually and through international cooperation, the measures, including specific programmes, which are needed: (a) To improve methods of production, conservation and distribution of food by making full use of technical and scientific knowledge, by disseminating knowledge of the principles of nutrition and by developing or reforming agrarian systems in such a way as to achieve the most efficient development and utilization of natural resources; (b) Taking into account the problems of both food-importing and food-exporting countries, to ensure an equitable distribution of world food supplies in relation to need.”
1. Article II of the UN’s International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (UNICESCR).
Food is a right to all. Apparently this is not the case.
Each and every time an issue pertaining to food scarcity springs up, pastoralists come to mind. There is sparse information on pastoral commons and even their food security mechanisms. In the last decade Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has endured numerous drought spells, which have in turn impacted negatively on the countries in the region. The worst hit areas have been those in the arid and semi arid lands (ASALs) of Sub Saharan Africa.
These regions, which are mostly inhabited, by pastoralists and agro-pastoralists are disaster zones at any given time. Owing to unpredictable weather patterns – less and sporadic rainfall – these areas experience much suffering as pastoralists with their cattle traverse vast regions and even cross borders in search of both pasture and water for themselves and their livestock. This migrant behaviour by pastoral communities has bred a unique geo-political co-existence mechanism in the region. Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Somalia, Ethiopia, Sudan, Eritrea and Djibouti are all encapsulated in this set-up. This migratory facet of pastoralists has least been recognised in the region. If anything all the governments in the region see migration as a pariah and archaic behaviour. But is it?
But while in most instances the weather and in some occasion locusts are the main culprits for food scarcity, there is another side of the coin. Poor political leadership, bureaucracy, and misgovernance are all major reasons affecting Africa’s pastoral people and their way of life. In the 1980s the Ethiopian drought debacle was a classic tale of bad political leadership. One is inclined to wonder why drought and hunger prevails in East and central Africa yet the region has a highly advanced weather and disaster prediction service? In other words, a proper, early warning system, which is capable of giving timely and adequate predictions for proper and well coordinated preparations to deal firmly with such disasters seems to be “absent”.
Development economist and Nobel laureate Dr Amartya Sen reckons: “No famine has ever taken place in the history of the world in a functioning democracy.” This remark cannot be further from the truth when one considers the daily travails of pastoral communities, in this region. Owing to neglect, lack of representation in the central government and the perennial “policy formulation – policy implementation” disconnect, these communities are overlooked in terms of national resource mobilization, allocation and infrastructure rollout. In other words they are less of a national priority. The media and even politicians have portrayed them alike as ‘conflict-loving communities’ among other demeaning epithets. Derogatory remarks are what these unique people with a culture that has survived eons have been subjected to. In fact pastoralists despite their contribution to the national economy ascertained by their livestock are hardly factored in when it comes to reaping benefits accruing from the national government.
To fully grasp the strategic importance of arid lands, picture these: Arid lands cover 80% of the Kenya’s total land surface area and 25% of the human population: Over 50% of the country’s livestock is to be found in these areas: 80% of Kenya’s eco-tourism facilities are in these areas. According to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) dryland ecosystems are extremely vulnerable to over-exploitation and inappropriate land uses. Few administrators and policy makers are yet to reckon with this fact (and the environmental hazards it portends), hence the total neglect of pastoralists. In fact government officers seconded to the region see their postings as less influential and ‘acts of demotion’. With such a warped, misguided and ignorant mindset it is no wonder then, they are amply abandoned. The Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO), estimates that there are over 800 million people in the world today, faced with starvation in the third world. The bulk of these 800 million people are drawn from pastoral communities. These are alarming statistics, considering that a binding international covenant (UNICESCR) exists to ward off hunger by ensuring the availability of food and its distribution to everyone.
Africa’s recent history with famine – Niger, Kenya and the Horn of Africa - indicate rather clearly the facet that food insecurity, which can lead to political instability, is an ever-present threat to the third world. As research has shown famine is not confined to climatic conditions per se, it is also linked to political decisions. While there exists comprehensive policies, addressing food security, the implementation of these policies and other laid down interventions mechanisms are more often bogged down by unwise political decisions and the tomfoolery of government bureaucrats. Kenya is an excellent case study for this:
“The central objective of national food security policy is to ensure that an adequate supply of nutritionally balanced foods is available in all parts of the country at all times. Given current resource constraints, the immediate aims of food security policy will be to obtain a calculated degree of security at the lowest cost. This will be achieved through: increasing food production in all areas of the country; emphasizing drought resistant crops such as sorghum and millet in dry land areas; the establishment of a food commodity monitoring and forecasting of weather conditions in the main agricultural zones and wider dissemination of information on expected weather trends; regulation of food exports to maintain domestic supplies and importation of food as necessary to meet nutritional requirements; and accumulation of a multi-commodity strategic food reserve from domestic surpluses and grain supplied on concessional terms to be used during periods of crop failure or other emergency situations.”
This is what Sessional Paper No 4 of 1981 on Kenya’s National Food Policy says. While on paper the policy seeks to ameliorate food scarcity, ward off hunger and check famine, the reality is that bureaucracy has prevented the full implementation of the policy which was passed a quarter of a century ago! This is pure chicanery. The worst affected are of course pastoral communities whose livelihoods are hampered due to inadequate food supply and severed food chain links owing to poor and sometimes non-existent infrastructure. In a speech he read at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, Dr. Jacques Diouf FAO Director General revealed the underlying paradigms that are caused by political immaturity. He said:
“Food is absolutely fundamental to human existence. One of the great successes of the 20th century was a rate of growth in food output that considerably surpassed the unprecedented rate of population growth. Today we can pride ourselves on the fact that we have the capacity to produce enough food for everyone on the planet to be adequately fed. If all food produced in the world were to be divided equally among its inhabitants, every woman, man and child would consume almost 2800 calories per day, which is 17% more calories than 30 years ago, despite the fact that the population has grown by 70% over the last 30 years. In the midst of all this abundance, however, there are still 800 million people in the developing world who do not have enough to eat. Undernourishment takes a heavy toll on health and productivity of individuals, communities and nations. About six million children under five years of age die every year as a result of hunger and undernutrition. Many of them die from disease such as diarrhoea, malaria and measles but could survive if they were better nourished. Vitamin A deficiency is responsible for blindness in 250,000 to 500,000 children each year. Twenty million people worldwide are mentally handicapped as a result of iodine deficiency, and each year 100,000 babies are born with irreversible brain damage as a result of maternal iodine inefficiency. FAO has estimated that developing countries have lost on average one percentage point from their economic growth each year as a result of insufficient energy intake.
“In an overall context of affluence, the fact that so many of our fellow beings are not adequately fed – and therefore not able to lead a full life – suggests that that there is something fundamentally flawed about the way in which our world is being managed. The world hunger problem is clearly political, not technical.”
With such candid words coming from the head of FAO, one begins to appreciate the insurmountable difficulties faced by pastoralists. Being vulnerable and belonging to minority communities is another disadvantage to pastoralists. Sadly this has been a historical problem. Right from the biblical times pastoralists have been inured with conflict. 66% of Africa is drylands. This fact alone emphasizes the width and breadth covered by these herding communities.
Conservation, agriculture and tough immigration laws are emerging factors hampering the enhancement of lives of these inimitable people. The influx of small weapons and other light artillery to herding communities by conflict merchants has led to the rise in flare-ups. The scarcity of pasture and watering points has been the most cited reason fuelling these conflicts. The only way to alter the situation for the better is to implement in full what is on paper and legally binds the government. In their classic song, Peter, Paul and Mary uttered the all time reminder, “…the answer my friend is blowing in the wind.” [END]
EDITOR’S NOTE: “Your views and comments on this issue are welcome. Is the region secure in terms of food supply? How robust are the food security policies of the region? Have your say.”