Dear Editor,
Once again, we were left completely disappointed with the more than usual rhetoric from the last G8 Summit in Okkaido, Japan a few days ago. Nothing in the declaration has given rise to any hope that the ‘big powers’ are really interested in committing more than just talk to advance the fight against climate change. This is a serious issue because in the midst of all the utterances behind closed doors at the summit, developing countries and small developing island states remain poor and extremely vulnerable to all the ills of this negative environmental phenomenon. Add to that the melting of the ice shelves at a rate faster than was predicted by scientists, and a worrying picture unfolds.
Still, in the face of all of that the World Bank sought to push billions of dollars onto the global environmental agenda, promoting itself as the institution that will make a positive difference in climate change. Yet, it remains a big financier of gas and oil undertakings, which benefit the rich countries while putting an additional environmental burden on the local communities in which some of these industries operate. Pollution, unethical environmental practices and other things characterize some of these massive endeavours in developing economies. We need a new model that would allow for more than words but rather for more tangible action that would really benefit those who need assistance. However, the G5 – Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa – made their deceleration prior to the G8 Summit. But these countries too have environmental concerns which add to the environmental cross all the world must now carry.
Though they appear more willing to work together towards sustainable development, reports on the environmental happenings in these countries are disturbing. Environmental degradation, deforestation, the development of heavy industries and pollution are still major sources of dissatisfaction among the very poor in China and India, while Brazil’s biofuel industries are seen as contributing to the global food crisis.
Nevertheless, whether it is the G8 or G5, there remain certain fundamental problems and challenges, while there is also fragmentation in the groupings. There is a suggestion that perhaps the G8 should become G13, but this too would have its disadvantages. For one it could slow down the decision-making process because the group would have to consider the views of an additional five states with varying cultures and at different stages of development. And fragmentation could become a bigger problem. Beyond the G8 the world needs a more qualitative integrated approach to the challenge of climate change in particular, and all the other global problems in general. Nothing less would work. This should include global corporations, non-governmental organizations and citizens’ networks.
The thing is governments are not always willing to take precise action in environmental management because it could affect the growth and development of their economies. This could influence public perception of their ability to govern and therefore they could lose power. Corporations are more concerned with making profits for their shareholders and getting ahead of the competition. Therefore, they are more likely to support governments which can help them position themselves to take advantage and improve their profit margins rather than the ones which seek to put in place environmental strictures. Because governments want to stay in power they would let up on corporate environmental accountability to allow those businesses to generate employment, wealth and prosperity for their economies.
As a result, the wellbeing of the environment and its citizens is not given priority. It is this deficit in democracy that allows for citizens to organize themselves into citizens’ networks or social movements to express their right to have a say in the way their environment and local communities are governed. This gap has given rise to numerous non-governmental organizations in every corner of the earth. It is these organizations and groups that create a sense of balance and provide space in the public sphere for marginal voices. Given the attitude of the wealthy economies, citizens in developing and poor states must organize themselves to struggle against climate change by adjusting their lifestyles to deal more sensibly with the way they dispose of their waste, their consumption of energy, and the way they treat their immediate environment. We have got to be able to demonstrate stewardship with our environment. We can do no less.
Yours faithfully,
Royston King
Executive Director
Environmental Community
Health Organization