Correa's Latinomics
One of the front running candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize is former US vice-president Al Gore. Gore’s nomination is on the basis of his cinematic efforts to put climate change on the world agenda. However, while Oslo gears up to name its favourite on Friday, a daring environmental initiative has been unfolding right here in Latin America. If successful, it might just be a reassuring answer to Gore’s “inconvenient truth.”
Last week Bariloche was host to the Latin American Conference on National Parks. One of the more interesting ideas presented was whether countries with a rich biodiversity could claim payment for “environmental services.” The idea being that the conservation of Latin America’s forests is in the interest of all mankind. Not only for the oxygen they produce, but also because, according to the government, burning forests account for 40 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the region. In exchange for safeguarding the “green lung,” then, poor countries should receive payment from rich countries.
“We shouldn’t just be wondering what Argentina can do about climate change,” Héctor Espina, in charge of the Argentina’s National Parks Administration, said at the conference. “We should also be looking at what our country can do to combat the effects of global warming. Among other things, we can offer our environmental services.” It’s a concept that has been gaining ground over the past few months.
Rafael Correa, Ecuador’s hugely popular president, recently floated the idea of a massive conservation for cash exchange that has been well received by the rich countries of the North and applauded as a possible model by those in the South. Correa’s suggestion is straightforward. Ecuador is home to the Yasuní national reserve, one of the most biodiverse regions on earth. Its 10,000 square kilometres of Amazon rainforest are home to thousands of plant and wildlife species as well as several undisturbed indigenous tribes. A place that should definitely be left untouched, is the global consensus, were it not that an estimated one billion barrels of crude oil lie underneath the tropical forest, worth about 720 million dollars a year.
Correa insists he’d rather not ravage the forest to get to the oil underneath, but he will if he has to. To make keeping the biodiversity intact a viable option, the Ecuadorean president has suggested rich nations compensate his country, thereby he claims, insuring their own supply of oxygen. “The whole world can breath, without paying us anything,” he said in a recent interview with Spain’s daily El País. “It’s in Ecuador’s best interest to extract that oil, that money will pay for schools and healthcare... however, on a global scale more will be lost than won.”
So Correa launched the idea that rich nations cough up 350 million dollars a year and in exchange Ecuador will let the forest be. During the UN General Assembly last month Correa again put forward his scheme, this time echoed by President Néstor Kirchner, who suggested swapping foreign debt for the conservation of natural reserves.
Up until now the Ecuadorean scheme has been well received. The governments of Germany, Italy, and Norway have taken a serious interest. The Clinton Initiative, a foundation run by the former US president, chose the project as the topic of debate for a meeting between world and business leaders after of the General Assembly. According to an Italian MP, “We have an ecological debt to pay back, and this suggestion by Ecuador is an intelligent solution. It’s the responsibility of all of us to look after these reserves.”
Despite the jubilant reception, the sale of environmental services is far from foolproof. Where will the money go? And when governments change hand, who will ensure the oil stays in the ground or that forests don’t get chopped down after all? What ever happens, after centuries of seeing its natural resources shipped off to other continents, its a good sign Latin America wants to turn global demand to its advantage — using market mechanisms to protect and not plunder its environment.
Meanwhile, Costa Rica, famous in Latin America for already cashing in on its environment, went to polls on Sunday and voted in favour of a Free Trade deal with the US. “Yes” led “No” by a little more than 3 points with 51,6 versus 48,3 percent.
Although a victory for the government of Oscar Arias, the approval of the trade agreement (TLC) doesn’t mean it will be implemented tomorrow. Arias had hoped that the divisive referendum could be quickly relegated to history, saying “We’re no longer ‘Yes’ and ‘No,’ tomorrow we’ll all march behind the same flag.”
The opposition, however, had other ideas, claiming fraud and asking for a recount. Even if they lose in a recount, they still have some clout with which to bring the process to a halt. Before the treaty can be implemented 13 laws must pass through Congress. These include legislation to free up markets such as telecom and insurance which must be approved before March 1, 2008, or else the treaty sinks. The government holds only 25 of the 57 seats, but governs with the consent of an ally, giving them a total of 38. However, powerful opposition groups such as the Partido Acción Ciudadana (PAC), which holds 17 seats, could well cause enough trouble for the government to fall short of the deadline.
Chances are though that won’t happen. This is Costa Rica, after all. Its reputation for mature politics is not without reason. More likely, the opposition will seek congressional approval for laws that buffer the worst side-effects of the TLC and for guarantees on such key issues as water supply and sanitation, preventing them from being entirely privatized. In exchange they’ll allow the 13 laws to pass, proving that Latin politics can be a game played by more than one. Fingers crossed.
First published in the Buenos Aires Herald on 09/10/2007
Last week Bariloche was host to the Latin American Conference on National Parks. One of the more interesting ideas presented was whether countries with a rich biodiversity could claim payment for “environmental services.” The idea being that the conservation of Latin America’s forests is in the interest of all mankind. Not only for the oxygen they produce, but also because, according to the government, burning forests account for 40 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the region. In exchange for safeguarding the “green lung,” then, poor countries should receive payment from rich countries.
“We shouldn’t just be wondering what Argentina can do about climate change,” Héctor Espina, in charge of the Argentina’s National Parks Administration, said at the conference. “We should also be looking at what our country can do to combat the effects of global warming. Among other things, we can offer our environmental services.” It’s a concept that has been gaining ground over the past few months.
Rafael Correa, Ecuador’s hugely popular president, recently floated the idea of a massive conservation for cash exchange that has been well received by the rich countries of the North and applauded as a possible model by those in the South. Correa’s suggestion is straightforward. Ecuador is home to the Yasuní national reserve, one of the most biodiverse regions on earth. Its 10,000 square kilometres of Amazon rainforest are home to thousands of plant and wildlife species as well as several undisturbed indigenous tribes. A place that should definitely be left untouched, is the global consensus, were it not that an estimated one billion barrels of crude oil lie underneath the tropical forest, worth about 720 million dollars a year.
Correa insists he’d rather not ravage the forest to get to the oil underneath, but he will if he has to. To make keeping the biodiversity intact a viable option, the Ecuadorean president has suggested rich nations compensate his country, thereby he claims, insuring their own supply of oxygen. “The whole world can breath, without paying us anything,” he said in a recent interview with Spain’s daily El País. “It’s in Ecuador’s best interest to extract that oil, that money will pay for schools and healthcare... however, on a global scale more will be lost than won.”
So Correa launched the idea that rich nations cough up 350 million dollars a year and in exchange Ecuador will let the forest be. During the UN General Assembly last month Correa again put forward his scheme, this time echoed by President Néstor Kirchner, who suggested swapping foreign debt for the conservation of natural reserves.
Up until now the Ecuadorean scheme has been well received. The governments of Germany, Italy, and Norway have taken a serious interest. The Clinton Initiative, a foundation run by the former US president, chose the project as the topic of debate for a meeting between world and business leaders after of the General Assembly. According to an Italian MP, “We have an ecological debt to pay back, and this suggestion by Ecuador is an intelligent solution. It’s the responsibility of all of us to look after these reserves.”
Despite the jubilant reception, the sale of environmental services is far from foolproof. Where will the money go? And when governments change hand, who will ensure the oil stays in the ground or that forests don’t get chopped down after all? What ever happens, after centuries of seeing its natural resources shipped off to other continents, its a good sign Latin America wants to turn global demand to its advantage — using market mechanisms to protect and not plunder its environment.
*******
Meanwhile, Costa Rica, famous in Latin America for already cashing in on its environment, went to polls on Sunday and voted in favour of a Free Trade deal with the US. “Yes” led “No” by a little more than 3 points with 51,6 versus 48,3 percent.
Although a victory for the government of Oscar Arias, the approval of the trade agreement (TLC) doesn’t mean it will be implemented tomorrow. Arias had hoped that the divisive referendum could be quickly relegated to history, saying “We’re no longer ‘Yes’ and ‘No,’ tomorrow we’ll all march behind the same flag.”
The opposition, however, had other ideas, claiming fraud and asking for a recount. Even if they lose in a recount, they still have some clout with which to bring the process to a halt. Before the treaty can be implemented 13 laws must pass through Congress. These include legislation to free up markets such as telecom and insurance which must be approved before March 1, 2008, or else the treaty sinks. The government holds only 25 of the 57 seats, but governs with the consent of an ally, giving them a total of 38. However, powerful opposition groups such as the Partido Acción Ciudadana (PAC), which holds 17 seats, could well cause enough trouble for the government to fall short of the deadline.
Chances are though that won’t happen. This is Costa Rica, after all. Its reputation for mature politics is not without reason. More likely, the opposition will seek congressional approval for laws that buffer the worst side-effects of the TLC and for guarantees on such key issues as water supply and sanitation, preventing them from being entirely privatized. In exchange they’ll allow the 13 laws to pass, proving that Latin politics can be a game played by more than one. Fingers crossed.
First published in the Buenos Aires Herald on 09/10/2007
posted by PIT @ 9:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home