by David Steven | Jun 25, 2007 | Climate and resource scarcity, North America
Cleo Paskal switched focus from the problems that climate change will exacerbate to the unfamiliar problems it could cause.
What if a small, low lying country disappears, she asked? Does it continue to exist as a ghost nation? Can it hold onto its UN seat, perhaps with a government-in-exile to keep its name alive?
And what will happen to maritime borders as sea levels rise? Paskal expands in a recent paper:
If the Florida coastline retreats up towards the middle of the state, and Cuba stays more or less as it is, should the border be moved to reflect the new midpoint?
That would push the entrance to the Gulf of Mexico into Cuban territorial waters, she points out. And the Cubans would be able to drill for oil where Miami once was…
by Alex Evans | May 9, 2007 | Climate and resource scarcity
A gaggle of UN agencies have just published a report on biofuels, says the Guardian this morning (see also previous Global Dashboard posts on biofuels). Although the report presents a mixed picture of upsides and downsides, it’s clear about the food security risks:
Expanded production [of biofuel crops] adds uncertainty. It could also increase the volatility of food prices with negative food security implications… The benefits to farmers are not assured, and may come with increased costs. [Growing biofuel crops] can be especially harmful to farmers who do not own their own land, and to the rural and urban poor who are net buyers of food, as they could suffer from even greater pressure on already limited financial resources. At their worst, biofuel programmes can also result in a concentration of ownership that could drive the world’s poorest farmers off their land and into deeper poverty.
Absolutely. Slightly confusing, then, to see UNEP head Achim Steiner saying the opposite, according to the FT last month:
The UN’s top environment official has backed a European Union plan to require the blending of plant-based biofuels into road fuels despite fears by environmentalists that this could lead to increased deforestation in south-east Asia and Brazil. Achim Steiner, head of the UN Environment Programme, said on Thursday that biofuels were needed to reduce global dependence on fossil fuels.
(more…)
by Alex Evans | Apr 24, 2007 | Climate and resource scarcity, Economics and development
Last week’s UK-sponsored debate on climate change in the Security Council this week was always going to be contentious, as the Guardian and the Times of India reported (see also a letter to the FT yesterday from UK special representative on climate change John Ashton). As China put it: “The developing countries believe that Security Council has neither the professional competence in handling climate change — nor is it the right decision-making place for extensive participation leading up to widely acceptable proposals.”
The G77 group of developing countries, together with China, have long been acutely sensitive to any perceived encroachment of the Security Council into non-security areas. ‘Soft’ issues like climate change, they argue, belong in the UN’s Economic and Social Council, or indeed in the full General Assembly; but emphatically not in the Security Council, which is seen as an exclusive great powers’ club.
From the perspective of the Foreign Office in London, by contrast, the Security Council debate was an example of ‘disruptive political action’ that could highlight the extent to which climate change is becoming a security issue. As Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett put it, “an unstable climate will exacerbate some of the core drivers of conflict — such as migratory pressures and competition for resources”.
Both China and the UK have a point. For last week’s squabble illustrates a crucial point: that just because climate change doesn’t belong in the Security Council, isn’t to say that it sits any more comfortably anywhere else.
(more…)
by Alex Evans | Mar 27, 2007 | Climate and resource scarcity, Economics and development, Global system
George Monbiot has a piece in today’s Guardian calling for a five year ban on biofuels. He writes:
In 2004 I warned, on these pages, that biofuels would set up a competition for food between cars and people. The people would necessarily lose: those who can afford to drive are richer than those who are in danger of starvation. It would also lead to the destruction of rainforests and other important habitats. I received more abuse than I’ve had for any other column – except for when I attacked the 9/11 conspiracists. I was told my claims were ridiculous, laughable, impossible. Well in one respect I was wrong. I thought these effects wouldn’t materialise for many years. They are happening already.
But, as he goes on to point out, since last year the price of maize has doubled, the price of wheat is at a 10 year high, and global grain stockpiles are at a 25 year low. And there have been food riots in Mexico because of the price of corn. A taste of what’s to come…
