Sara Wolcott's blogshttp://www.justmeans.com/editorials/sustainabledevelopment/7.htmlFri, 25 May 2012 00:16:05 GMThttp://www.justmeans.com en hourly 1http://www.justmeans.com/New-journal-promotes-global-public-policy---at-long-last/21099.htmlThu, 01 Jul 2010 01:50:54 GMTSara Wolcott The launch of new academic journals rarely gets much popular press - and for good reason. Too often, academic journals don't really speak to the needs of the public.But there is a new journal out there that is worth knowing about - especially if you are interested in global issues that 'need global governance'. Yes, it is definately academic - but it is for practitioners too, and it is a journal that might make a real difference in promoting good work for global sustainability.The launch of the Read Full Article ]]> The launch of new academic journals rarely gets much popular press - and for good reason. Too often, academic journals don't really speak to the needs of the public.But there is a new journal out there that is worth knowing about - especially if you are interested in global issues that 'need global governance'. Yes, it is definately academic - but it is for practitioners too, and it is a journal that might make a real difference in promoting good work for global sustainability.The launch of the Global Policy Journal in 2010 was the cumulation of David Held's 20+ years of experience on global institutions that are 'no longer fit for purpose'. The Journal proposes that the evident changes in finance, climate change and security are all aspects of a 'hydra headed crises' where old paradigms are failing current needs. The journal is the first 'space' for global discussions on global institutions and policy that integrates practice and theory. They are now onto their second issue - with a fabulous website, events, reviews and blogs all lined up.Held argues for global governing system that can go beyond national politics. Tells the story of the modern economic system, and suggests need for new global regulatory framework for finance and a global medium of exchange (rather than reliance on a single national currency) and to transform away from consumer/security-intensive model towards a sustainable, inequality-reducing model. Then links to insecure spaces/ungoverned spaces. He and others argue for a need for global policy regarding security forces - and other global challenges.Exciting? Yes - because for too long, sustainable development has been 'talking global' but hasn't had the forums needed to enable that talk to go anywhere. This is still talk (though with its focus on practitioners as well as on theorists, it is going in the right direction), but at least it is bringing threads, people and ideas together.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Civil-Society-Organisations-Suffering-around-the-World/21095.htmlThu, 01 Jul 2010 01:41:57 GMTSara Wolcott At the start of the financial crisis, it was feared that development aid would substantially fall after having reached its highest level in years. However, the OECD recently issued a report that stated that 2008 and 2009 did not seen a substantial decrease in aid flows; indeed, there was a slight rise. It is currently anticipated that most donors will meet their 2010 targets. This is leading to a 'feel good' approach about aid - but it is very deceiving.Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) have fi Read Full Article ]]> At the start of the financial crisis, it was feared that development aid would substantially fall after having reached its highest level in years. However, the OECD recently issued a report that stated that 2008 and 2009 did not seen a substantial decrease in aid flows; indeed, there was a slight rise. It is currently anticipated that most donors will meet their 2010 targets. This is leading to a 'feel good' approach about aid - but it is very deceiving.Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) have financially suffered as a result of the financial, food and fuel crises at a time when the demand for their services is increasing. According to a recent study commissioned by the United Nations Secretariat that surveyed 640 CSOs around the world, the majority of their respondees experienced budgetary constraints between 2008-2009, mostly as significant funding (especially from private foundations, financial houses and other corporate donors and individual contributions) was no longer available due to the credit crunch. 47 per cent of CSOs indicated that they struggle with the consequences of their budget cuts.While some have become more efficient, 41 per cent report that their organizations have serious unsolved problems due to the crises. This is happening at the same time that 33 per cent of the responding CSOs expect a large increase in demand (from the populations they work with) over the next two years - especially for emergency relief, capacity building and long-term development programs. As a result, Especially in Europe and the United States, CSOs have increased their fundraising efforts. Those who have more diversified sources of funding, have a heavy and stable reliance upon volunteers and who are self-sustainable (possibly through combining non-profit with for-profit ventures) have been less vulnerable. Those who did not see a reduction in giving anticipate that there will be a reduction in 2010 or 2011.That said, many of the CSOs are aware that even if they had the funds currently lacking, the scale of the challenge is beyond them; many (continue) to call upon states to take up their work via improving their social protection/social services (possibly through progressive taxes); if the states can not do this (perhaps because of corruption), CSOs encourage donor organization to give directly to them to ensure that services are delivered.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Sustainable-Development-needs-security--not-guns/21088.htmlThu, 01 Jul 2010 00:41:18 GMTSara Wolcott When the US Supreme Court said that States could not prohibit their citizens from carrying firearms in public this Monday, immediate questions were raised for the implications of this ruling for sustainable development.Security is one of the most crucial pre-conditions for sustainable development. Fragile states - and cities - around the world struggle to achieve sustainable development against almost unbeatable odds: warfare and violent conflict is inherently disruptive to the prosperity of reg Read Full Article ]]> When the US Supreme Court said that States could not prohibit their citizens from carrying firearms in public this Monday, immediate questions were raised for the implications of this ruling for sustainable development.Security is one of the most crucial pre-conditions for sustainable development. Fragile states - and cities - around the world struggle to achieve sustainable development against almost unbeatable odds: warfare and violent conflict is inherently disruptive to the prosperity of regular citizens and the planet. It creates fear-filled 'war economies' run by warlords and those who benefit from trafficking in guns, drugs, people, and illegal substances - which usually has disastrous impacts on any kind of long term developmental process and on the local environment. Increasingly, development organisations are being forced - partly through the growing concerns about terrorism, partly because in-security is increasingly impacting them - to find joined-up solutions with Departments of Defense. It is not, to put it mildly, an easy partnership.Controlling - even elliminating - the trade in small arms is generally seen as a potential solution to some of the rampant violence in fragile states. In some areas, access to guns is higher than access to basic food stuff. It makes it easier for children to become child-soldiers, for communities to 'suddenly' erupt into violence, and for more death to happen more quickly.But controlling the arms trade is very difficult to do. Not least, the people who financially benefit will go to great political lengths to keep those metal containers rolling off the production line and into the hands of people who intend to use them.Other solutions include 'bottom up', community-based approaches to security. Those communities where people know one another and watch out for one another tend to be significantly safer - and far more effective - than those guarded by barbed wire and security alarms.Given the challenges caused by free-flowing arms trades where people are allowed to carry guns openly in some of the most dangerous parts of the world - and where that fact is part of what makes them some of the most dangerous parts of the world - one has to wonder if the recent ruling is really going to bring 'freedom' to the American people.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/A-New--Global-Pulse----Using-emerging-technologies-for-sustainable-development/20887.htmlTue, 29 Jun 2010 17:38:00 GMTSara Wolcott The Secretariat General has also launched the UN Global Impact Vulnerability Alert System (UN GIVAS) which has recently been re-named 'Global Pulse.' This new agency is using emerging technologies in ways never done before to do critical work: monitoring in as close to real-time as possible the changing conditions of vulnerable people. In it's own words, it seeks to use emerging technologies to "close theinformation gap between the onset of a global crisis and the availability of actionable info Read Full Article ]]> The Secretariat General has also launched the UN Global Impact Vulnerability Alert System (UN GIVAS) which has recently been re-named 'Global Pulse.' This new agency is using emerging technologies in ways never done before to do critical work: monitoring in as close to real-time as possible the changing conditions of vulnerable people. In it's own words, it seeks to use emerging technologies to "close theinformation gap between the onset of a global crisis and the availability of actionable information to protect vulnerable populations" through regional PULSE Labs'. Global Pulse feels that we now 'live in an age of vulnerability' and interdependence where traditional monitoring systems - especially large macroeconomic indicators or annual World Bank reports - are inadequate to inform policy makers about the reality of how their populations - especially their vulnerable populations - are fairing. Global Pulse is, thus, in the active process of designing what they hope will at least a partial solution to this challenge, brining fast, immediate and up-to date information about how vulnerable people are being affected by the crisis to the appropriate authorities. The UN has made the financial crisis a 'priority' since 2008. From the beginning, it has recognized the interconnection between food, fuel and financial crisis, and the impact of climate change. They recognized the need for an international coordinated responses. They sought to do so while addressing the 'fundamental imbalancs in the global economy' including market failures and the other food, educational, employment, and social 'gaps' that preceded the crisis. They have emphasized that this should not be a seen as an attempt to recover back to 'business as usual' as soon as possible but should, instead, entail deep structural changes. Much of their work and published material to date, from UNICEF to UNDP to World Food Programme, has been in monitoring the impacts of the food, fuel and financial crisis; however, the initiatives such as Global Pulse, UNEP's Green Economy Initiative, the International Labor Organisation's (ILO) Global Jobs Pack go beyond monitoring and try to create better responses. Most of these initiatives are relatively new, though many build on previous work. While the websites and reports of the UN system emphasize the need for an ongoing, integrated response (most recently couched as 'recovery with a human face'), recent informal interviews with people within the system suggest that the reality perpetuates previous images of the UN system as being uncoordinated, unfocused, poor intra-agency communication, fiercely territorial and beset with beuracratic challenges. Can the Global Pulse help with this? For all its faults, the UN is the only place where all governments have a voice; but sustainable development needs the fiercely intelligent people working for the UN to be able to use their full capacity. Global Pulse just might be able help with this process - sometimes, new technology can transform the institutions it interacts with. Which might be just what the UN system - and the global community it strives to serve - needs.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Pausing-on-Opportunity/20189.htmlThu, 24 Jun 2010 14:16:29 GMTSara Wolcott Throughout the multiple crises that must be surmounted in order to achieve anything that resembles sustainable development, one of the most commonly used tropes is that of the Chinese character for 'crisis' combines 'danger' with 'opportunity'. From Milton Friedman to Joseph Stiglitz to Gordon Brown, from the American (and Middle Eastern) Gulf disaster(s) to the financial crisis, at this point, any intelligent reader surely 'knows' that meaning of the Chinese character 'wei-ji' - though they mig Read Full Article ]]> Throughout the multiple crises that must be surmounted in order to achieve anything that resembles sustainable development, one of the most commonly used tropes is that of the Chinese character for 'crisis' combines 'danger' with 'opportunity'. From Milton Friedman to Joseph Stiglitz to Gordon Brown, from the American (and Middle Eastern) Gulf disaster(s) to the financial crisis, at this point, any intelligent reader surely 'knows' that meaning of the Chinese character 'wei-ji' - though they might not be able to draw the character. The use of this term in this way harkens to US President John F Kennedy's use of this trope in 1959, and it was later picked up by Richard Nixon. Despite the wide political breadth between these two men, both wanted to assure the American public (an often a skittish bunch) that despite how 'bad' things might look now, fear not, for an appropriate attitude can lead to a better tomorrow.There are, however, two problems with this. First: it is an inaccurate translation of the character. Second, jumping into 'opportunity' too fast is, well, dangerous. High likelihood of further crises ensue. 'Wei' does, indeed, mean danger/perilous/fear. But 'ji' is more complex. The compound noun 'jihui' does mean 'opportunity', but 'ji' has numerous meanings, including 'machine, crucial point, incipient moment, opportunity, chance, secret, cunning'. Its meaning depends on the character preceding it. In this case, it is closer to 'crucial point' than 'opportunity'. Thus 'wei-ji' might better be translated as 'danger crucial point'. Chinese language specialist Victor Mair at University of Pennsylvania suggests that the rampant mis-use of the term might be a result of wishful thinking combined with an poor understanding of the Chinese language system.The romantic notion that the Wise Chinese Ancients understood crises better than modern Westerners do is not only misleading (especially when interpreted incorrectly) but risks the danger of not recognising what a crisis is. Ironically, the old Greek 'krisis' from which the English term 'crisis' derived in the late 1400s is closer to what these pundits seek: it emphasises a 'decisive' time for a 'turning point' in (traditionally) a disease for 'better or for worse'.The rush to look for opportunity in every crisis runs the danger of not recognising what the crisis itself often is. If anything, crises should be taken as times to slow down. As Naomi Klein's 'Shock Doctrine' points out, after crises, people are in a state of shock - and are less able to critically consider the options before them. She argues that many neo-liberal policies were rolled out when countries were in a state of shock and unable to say no. From one 'crisis' thus ensued many others.A wise doctor ensures he knows what the roots of the 'crisis' is before he suggests treatment; she knows that in a crisis-situation, the wrong treatment will lead to loosing the patient. When we talk about our ecological, food, health, water, climatic, financial and security systems being in a state of 'crisis', loosing the patient is quite serious. Ensuring the response fits the causes of the symptoms becomes paramount. This entails recognising the real losses that have already occurred and not jumping over them in a rush to obtain that seemingly fleeting opportunity. Without fully recognising the problems, people jump too fast, and that 'ji' will quickly becomes lost in the 'wei' of danger.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/The-challenge-of-niceness/17274.htmlSat, 05 Jun 2010 05:57:40 GMTSara Wolcott I've a personal, relatively new challenge that many of you might have also experienced. After over a year of blogging for Justmeans on sustainable development, the past few months have brought several opportunities to blog about CSR and international development via my live blogging at various conferences. Through that, I've had the opportunity to meet and slowly build relationships with individuals working at a variety of companies, producing a wide variety of products. And in the process, I'm Read Full Article ]]> I've a personal, relatively new challenge that many of you might have also experienced. After over a year of blogging for Justmeans on sustainable development, the past few months have brought several opportunities to blog about CSR and international development via my live blogging at various conferences. Through that, I've had the opportunity to meet and slowly build relationships with individuals working at a variety of companies, producing a wide variety of products. And in the process, I'm confronting a new challenge: how to interact with companies who are producing products that I personally disagree with and would never consume (and would actively discourage others to buy). Especially when the actual people that I'm interfacing with are, well, great. Really great. The kind of people I'd want to have over for dinner, watch my kids (if I had them), talk about future career choices. They are not sales people. They are working to make these big companies whose products and practices impact people across Africa, Asia and Latin America (the majority of the world's population) at least a little bit better. To use the money and the practices from major corporations for good - from philanthropy (which is, as we know, not enough) to embedding sustainability into the strategy of a company to creating the social impact assessments that will effect everything else. When we talk about doing projects together, I want to do it - because I see how that project could make a difference and, importantly, because I like them. But are they the cute tiger cubs that hide their mother's ferociousness?I can't fully get past the product. I'm not just talking about Phillip Morris and Big Tabacco. I'm clear I'm not going to work with them. But take a more complicated, less 'dangerous' product. Take the example of Coke. Big company. Huge impact on international development. Coke, more than most other organisations, can get its product into every place imaginable. It is hard to find a village in Africa that doesn't have a coke bottle strewn besides it; hard to find a town that doesn't sell coke. Could international development learn from Coke? You bet. From delivery systems to marketing, Coke's capacity is better than most NGOs - including disaster and conflict organisations. And Coke is aiming to be seen as a company that makes a difference and ensures a positive contribution to sustainable development, and many of those ventures are good. If it lobbied governments in the West to get the right money to the right places for climate adaptation (or water, or food security, or any other issue that does, legitimately, effect its sustainability), Western governments might very well listen.But at the end of the day, Coke is still Coke. A sugary, caffeine-enhanced substance that is hardly nutritious. Even if one ignore's its past history in international development, the product itself is one I actively try to tell my friends (especially young people) not to drink. I won't have much impact - drinking coke is cool, and my little voice telling my friends not to drink it because it is not good for their body won't do much. But I've seen women farmers in Western Kenya sell their cow's milk in order to buy coke - loosing the valuable nutrition that comes with milk for the addictive substance of refined sugar and caffeine. For a long time, my response to Coke was to avoid them. I don't drink the stuff. But as I interact with them, I find myself more than willing to work with them - because I can't ignore them, they are too big and too powerful and the impact that I could make by working with Coke is far greater than ignoring them. And the people I've met there are so.... nice. Smart, funny, interesting and a pleasure to work with. Of course, so were the majority of armies who have committed many of the worse atrocities in the world. But is this taking away my own integrity? How do others dance this dance?]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Development-Enterprises--development-business-better/17231.htmlFri, 04 Jun 2010 17:31:14 GMTSara Wolcott Categories are useful - but they can blind us to what is really happening. And there are few stronger categories that run through western culture as does 'market' and 'state'. For at least the past few hundred years, much of the West has divided these two societal forces. 'Development' of course requires combinations of both - indeed, most real societal change does. And while 'development' might often be seen as the domain of charities and CSR, that is a false perception - it has always included Read Full Article ]]> Categories are useful - but they can blind us to what is really happening. And there are few stronger categories that run through western culture as does 'market' and 'state'. For at least the past few hundred years, much of the West has divided these two societal forces. 'Development' of course requires combinations of both - indeed, most real societal change does. And while 'development' might often be seen as the domain of charities and CSR, that is a false perception - it has always included business. From pre-colonial times to colonisation to the past 50+ years of independence (for Africa) and 'development' business has - for better and for worse - been a key part of development. Of course, one can recognise that development is, itself, also a business.But most multinational corporations and many in the international NGO community who talk about 'sustainable international development' are missing some of the major shifts and changes - new players who don't fit into the older model. They fall somewhere between social enterprises, development organisations, and businesses who are seeking to turn an deficit into an opportunity and an opportunity into a mutually beneficial, often profit- driven experience. We might call these new beasts 'development enterprises'. And in this growing world, the old distinctions of market and state don't really work. Often, it is hard to tell where the market stops and the state starts. Service provision - from health to water to food to sanitation - is one area where these old distinctions don't work, from Africa to India. And then when one is trying to recognise the tremendous role that the informal (and unregulated) market plays, and the potential for profit, new molds are springing up. Grameen Bank is but the tip of the ice burg. Just because we don't have good names for them, doesn't mean they are out there. And 'old fashioned' western business has better watch out - because it is no longer the only market-game in town.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/At-the-dark-horizon-of-development--from-Haiti-to-Deepwater/16580.htmlThu, 03 Jun 2010 09:27:38 GMTSara Wolcott They say that if you want to really understand a system, you go to where the conditions are worse. If it works - or doesn't work - in the worse case scenarios, then that tells you about the rest of the system, where things are 'fine'. We at justmeans are interested in the deep implications of this horrific BP spill. Maybe one of the deep implications is how much deeper we need to be delving if we are going to ensure that the challenges that shine so clearly via the BP spill - and the still-troub Read Full Article ]]> They say that if you want to really understand a system, you go to where the conditions are worse. If it works - or doesn't work - in the worse case scenarios, then that tells you about the rest of the system, where things are 'fine'. We at justmeans are interested in the deep implications of this horrific BP spill. Maybe one of the deep implications is how much deeper we need to be delving if we are going to ensure that the challenges that shine so clearly via the BP spill - and the still-troubling, hardly-rebuilt situation in Haiti.In a recent 'This American Life' show on the faltering attempts to rebuild Haiti just as the rainy season is coming in, the question was asked, 'what if Haiti isn't behind the rest of the world, but ahead?' Certainly when it comes to global trends such as deforestation, animal loss, poverty, lost business opportunities, economic crises, etc, Haiti is way ahead of the curve. Is it just a question of waiting for the rest of the world to follow? As well over 5,000 gallons of oil a day gush out of the ocean (how can one even imagine that amount? It is enough to give one nightmares), the human and environmental destruction is horrendous. Haitians are suffering from a 'natural disaster'; the Americans and others who will suffer from Deep Horizon are suffering from an 'unnatural disaster'. Of course, that it is happening all at once makes it easy to see - as my post on a Nigerian perspective demonstrates, this is hardly new. As others have pointed out, the later is a clear sign of an addiction that is destroying the planet (as if we needed another warning).What if these mars on our planet demonstrate not only some of the unpleasant consequences of 'natural' and unnatural disasters, but the thrust of the future?Then we had best learn, and learn quickly for sustainable development.What we know works: the outpouring of global support (in both Haiti and Deepwater); social networking; technologies such as 'Oil Reporter',an open data initiative of CrisisCommons that encourages response organizations to capture and share data with the public as they responnd to the BP oil spill. CrisisCommons is doing great work to use open source technology to respond to disasters, bridging relief-organisations and technology. It 'works' if crises are big and fast and sudden so that people can see them and notice them. Especially if they effect an entire country (Haiti) or the United States (Deepwater) or another developed country. It helps to have a progressive government that takes disasters and poor people seriously (Deepwater versus Katrina, for example). Crises can be opportunities for different growth - a new push for renewable energy in the States - though that movement has not affected the UK in the same way.What doesn't work: If disasters happen slowly, or in places often 'forgotten' by the world - an earthquake in South America went largely unnoticed; Nigeria has been having ongoing smaller leaks and spills for 30 years, accumulating more oil than the Deep Horizon spill. Disorganised, unconnected, non-systemic responses. the failure of governments to get their act together. Companies not taking responsibility for their actions. Communities left stranded without resources to support their real needs. The international community's tendency to forget things.If we learn anything from Haiti that we can apply to Deepwater, it is this: crises may happen swiftly, but they take a long time to fix. That requires sustained attention. That takes more than crowdsourcing. How can we learn to do that - especially if these are not just blips but waves, even potential tsunami-warnings? We need to address the causes. Our addiction to oil is a big cause. But so too is our inability to listen to the needs of poor communities the world over - and the challenge we have in getting out of 'silo-thinking'. Attend to that, and we might have enough warning from these 'signals' to find some very high ground.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Bringing-the-Future-into-the-Present---by-bringing-in-more-presence/16564.htmlMon, 31 May 2010 08:07:52 GMTSara Wolcott In business, the quarterly report is bemoaned by those seeking long term sustainable change as it puts focus on short term profit over long term thinking. In international development, short time frames for long-term problems such as reducing poverty are also much bemoaned. In international finance, the high profitability of short term trading makes long term investments difficult to secure and prone to problems. When business, investment and international development have things in common (and Read Full Article ]]> In business, the quarterly report is bemoaned by those seeking long term sustainable change as it puts focus on short term profit over long term thinking. In international development, short time frames for long-term problems such as reducing poverty are also much bemoaned. In international finance, the high profitability of short term trading makes long term investments difficult to secure and prone to problems. When business, investment and international development have things in common (and there are quite a few), one can be sure that there's a substantial problem. In this case, the structures of the vast majority of Western-stylized institutions are not created in such a way that we are able to think about 'the long now'. 7-generational thinking, as suggested by many Native American communities? Yeah, right. We can't even think one generation ahead. We need a way to bring the future into the present - to enable and encourage long term thinking for sustainable development.But at the same time, we in the 'globalised' world have a hard time actually being in the present moment. Our distracted, atomised selves bounce from idea to idea and place to place faster than ever. Advertising, media, the demands of a fast-paced world - all of it makes slowing down and simply being present, moment by moment, difficult. And if sustainable development requires personal and organisational well being and if wellbeing requires us to be fully present to our own lives, then we are clearly not there yet.It seems as if these two needs - for long term thinking and for greater present moment awareness - are contradictory. But what if the solutions were intertwined? If we slowed down some in the present moment, we might well become more attuned to the impacts our actions were having - right now. Many of the 'problems' of sustainable development - such as climate change - are already upon us. Climate migration is already happening. Water is already short. People are already malnourished. Future trends might well exasperate these tendencies, but we don't need to focus too much on the future to realise that the real challenges are already before us. Future-trends might help us see what to pay attention to - so much is happening in the present moment - but our fundamental capacity to be adaptive and responsive to future crises and the inevitable unknown unknowns that so often knock governments, businesses and aid agencies of course lies not only in long term thinking and strategic planning but in immediate present moment awareness. Which can be seen as separate from short term thinking - short term thinking is rarely a full appreciation of the impact one's present actions are having on others (and on one's self). Cultivating presence - or mindfulness, if you prefer - can, thus, enable us to cultivate our adaptive capacity for long term solutions to long term problems.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Conclusion-offered-during--Creating-Shared-Value-/16531.htmlMon, 31 May 2010 06:11:06 GMTSara Wolcott At the end of Nestle's conference on 'Creating Shared Value', Graham Baxter (acting CEO of the International Business Leaders Forum), Nestle CEO Paul Blucke and Harvard's JFK Director of Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative Jane Nelson had a conversation about the 'global partnerships'. It had been a long day, with panels discussing rural development, nutrition and water - the audience was restless, tired and ready to move on. At the end of the 'conclusions', Nestle awarded their new 'Crea Read Full Article ]]> At the end of Nestle's conference on 'Creating Shared Value', Graham Baxter (acting CEO of the International Business Leaders Forum), Nestle CEO Paul Blucke and Harvard's JFK Director of Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative Jane Nelson had a conversation about the 'global partnerships'. It had been a long day, with panels discussing rural development, nutrition and water - the audience was restless, tired and ready to move on. At the end of the 'conclusions', Nestle awarded their new 'Creating Shared Value Prize' toInternational Development Enterprises (IDE) Cambodia for a project which increases the standard of living of Cambodian rural population by improving agricultural productivity and income.Nestle SA CEO Paul Bulcke attempted to offer an overview of the highlights from the day. He seemed a tad overwhelmed by the immense amount of 'interesting information' that had been debated, and not altogether sure how it all hung together. He did point to the end of an era where 'development' meant 'you (dark poor people) need to become like us (rich white people)' - though one has to question how much this era has truly ended when one considers much of the work and attitudes still being advanced by different development organisations.Jane Nelson from JFK and Director of the CSR Initiative there, however, graciously stole the show. She's been called a 'CSR rockstar' in the past, and it doesn't take long to see why. Kudos to Nestle for getting her - and long may be she grace such gatherings exploring the relationship between international development and doing business better. She's also recently released a delightful book, 'The business of peace' exploring how business can and should contribute to peace keeping and conflict resolution the world over. At the end of the conference, she pointed out the importance of four main concerns.1.Thinking Systemically. It was a theme throughout the conference. This requires a new style of leadership between different issues, not just within issues. In a situation of growing complexity, it is essential that one's core business operations and value chains embody sustainabile development. She pointed to the importance and potential of collaborative partnerships at the local and watershed level - not just at the global or national level. And she highlighted to systemic thinking in governance - including the challenge of building political will where it doesn't already exist - is clearly a major challenge. Business needs to use their potential to influence governance to do so for the good of the entire community - ie, supporting initiatives to create better infrastructure and to deal with corruption.2.She pointed to the 'disconnects' that were apparent throughout the day:. This included short term vs long term thinking - it is important to deliver on both and the importance of women in enabling development and yet their lack of power, including representation on the panels at the conference itself.3.Trust and Accountability - critical - and to whom are we (business and development) accountable? How do business gain trust from communities (not damaging their fish is a good start)? How do we manage multiple accountabilities - in both business and international development? Justmeans knows the importance of accountability - as shown in the recent conference on the 2010 Amsterdam Global Conference on Sustainability and Transparency#griconference.4.Scaling up and Scaling out - yup. That one is also critical for international development.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Water--a--human-right-in-need-of-the-right-price/16528.htmlMon, 31 May 2010 05:59:31 GMTSara Wolcott In case you haven't heard, water's a big issue in international development. And at Nestle's conference on 'Creating Shared Value', it was this panel, of all the panels, that had the most passion - and where Nestle was able to shine. Or at least, Nestle S.A. Chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe was able to shine. Turns out that when Nestle did a serious examination of the challenges before them in the next few decades, what they came up with was water. He said that 'we will run out of water before we Read Full Article ]]> In case you haven't heard, water's a big issue in international development. And at Nestle's conference on 'Creating Shared Value', it was this panel, of all the panels, that had the most passion - and where Nestle was able to shine. Or at least, Nestle S.A. Chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe was able to shine. Turns out that when Nestle did a serious examination of the challenges before them in the next few decades, what they came up with was water. He said that 'we will run out of water before we run out of oil. The issue is where, how and when water is available more than absolute quantity of water.' Thus, monsoons (which we expect more of with climate change) are unleashing water, but it is not captured in current infrastructure. And without fresh water - well, it goes without saying that that destroys any food company's business model. He emphasized that Nestle recognized that water has 3 main dimensions: as a social good, an ecological good and a commercial good. He suggested that the commercial good must come last. He also argued that water is a human right for basic hydration and hygiene. It is not, however, a human right for swimming pools and lawns. Too often confuse the two. He felt that biofuels that use food for fuel is a 'criminal activity'. Poor people's food should never be used to fuel rich people's cars. It was this sentiment that got the biggest applause from the audience. The panel had a fair amount of agreement with his sentiments: water was crucial (of course, they were all water people - but then again, how can one argue with the essence of life itself?); basic water needs especially for children were a human right and beyond that, it made sense to price water. Water, afterall, requires infrastructure and man power - and that has costs. The panel also agreed that while water should be priced, that price should not be speculated on by the international market. Trade in water needs to happen at the sub-national level; preferably within a given watershed.But pricing water is rarely politically popular - although Stuart Orr from WWF International pointed out that the cost of water in a South African township was greater than in New York City. Such strong agreement - and such passion - on this panel might suggest an opportunity for real action. Perhaps this is an area where Nestle - and other key players who agree with this stance - can lobby governments to pressure for attending to the basic human rights to water - and the importance of finding paying the right price for the real costs that this essential element entails.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Nutrition----between-development--consumption--and-a-billion-bottoms/16523.htmlMon, 31 May 2010 05:47:03 GMTSara Wolcott Nutrition: once a primary concern of international development, it has recently enjoyed a renaissance of interest. Even the G8 are concerned with addressing maternal health. While diseases of malnourishment are not as severe as they used to be, millions of children still die from malnutrition and stunting is still a chief concern the world over. Given that Nestle sells food products, it is not too surprising that in their desire to 'create shared value' they emphasize nutrition - and this confer Read Full Article ]]> Nutrition: once a primary concern of international development, it has recently enjoyed a renaissance of interest. Even the G8 are concerned with addressing maternal health. While diseases of malnourishment are not as severe as they used to be, millions of children still die from malnutrition and stunting is still a chief concern the world over. Given that Nestle sells food products, it is not too surprising that in their desire to 'create shared value' they emphasize nutrition - and this conference on 'Creating Shared Value' in London had a panel to discuss the issue.Nestle is making some progress. For one, they have hired an excellent former academic nutrition expert to help mainstream concerns for nutrition into their main products - leading to the 'taste-plus' model, in which their products both have to taste great but also have the 'plus' of being more nutritious than their competitors.Many on the panel, however, argued not only that we need to work to end malnutrition (the panel disagreed on the best approach: focusing on educating women? researching and then enhancing products with micronutrients? Increasing overall economic growth in the hopes that strong GDP growth would enhance nutrition (though the evidence is more complicated)?) but that we need focus just as much on over-nutrition. Or, as Lawrence Haddad from the Institute of Development Studies suggested, we need to be concern not only for the 'bottom billion' that threatens to grow larger (thanks not least to the financial crisis) but for the 'billions of bottoms' that keep getting larger. The major killer nutrition-related diseases of the world are no longer malnutrition or mineral deficiencies; they are increasingly the diseases of the 'developed world' - diabetes, heart disease and other chronic diseases that are made worse by 'overnutrition' and that need long term solutions. Like under-nutrition, over-nutrition requires getting beyond diet and into a systemic approach.And herein lies one of the ironies - and corporate challenges - before us: one of the best ways of getting rid of excess weight is getting rid of excess food - especially processed food. Take the subtitle of Michael Pollan's book, 'In defense of food' as a good rule of thumb: 'Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.' Nestle - and many other food companies - sells creams & desserts, cookies and cakes, confectionery - from choclate bars to Kit Kats to biscuits, chilled meats, breakfast cereals and drinks (coffees, aero, 'skinny cow milk', etc.) While they are growing their bottled water production, and while milk would count as 'real food', one has to admit that most of their products list don't really fit Pollan's suggestions. So given that overconsumption of processed foods is one of the major nutritional problems today, and Nestle is seeking to be a leader in nutrition - what is it going to do? Will it get into sourcing whole fruits and vegetables and discouraging the wide range of Kit-Kat-like products which, however tasty and popular, are (one of the many factors) contributing to obesity and over-nutrition in modern society? Several members of the audience raised these questions, but I didn't hear very many strong answers from the panel. Haddad argued that the private sector - especially Nestle - has a great deal to offer nutrition in international development through what he called the '4 Ls - learning, linking, leveraging and leadership'. The other panelists - many nutritionists and doctors - seemed to agree. So while there is agreement that Nestle and other multinational food companies have a role to play in ending malnutrition and addressing overnutrition, it is less clear how companies can work to end the overconsumption that enables their very survival yet limits their ability to create true nutritional 'value' for people the world over.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Nestle--trying-to--create-shared-value--in-international-development/16519.htmlMon, 31 May 2010 05:23:03 GMTSara Wolcott On May 28, Nestle held their annual 'Creating Shared Value' conference and their first 'Creating Shared Value' prize. It consisted of a series of panels on Rural Development, Nutrition and Water. This is the first of a series of blogs on reflections and pertinent issues raised during the conference. Nestle brought together a superb group of academics, thought leaders and their own staff to fill the audience with their thoughts. But judging from the discussions during the break, it was too 'abstr Read Full Article ]]> On May 28, Nestle held their annual 'Creating Shared Value' conference and their first 'Creating Shared Value' prize. It consisted of a series of panels on Rural Development, Nutrition and Water. This is the first of a series of blogs on reflections and pertinent issues raised during the conference. Nestle brought together a superb group of academics, thought leaders and their own staff to fill the audience with their thoughts. But judging from the discussions during the break, it was too 'abstract' - not because it was academics who were doing the talking, but because it was unclear what all the talk was really for.The conference gave Nestle a chance to showcase some of their recent work in community projects around the world and 'creating shared value' (a variation of win-win solutions for business and communities). But was it anything more than an elaborate show-and-tell gathering with some networking opportunities and the added benefit of a chance to hear some cutting edge thinking in critical developmental issues? I questioned several of the Nestle employees who had a hand in shaping the conference and asked them about their goals. One of them said, well, we really wanted to emphasize that business can be a force for good in society. And we want NGOs to stop hassling us.Nestle's had a bad run with the civil society community, not least due to one of the more powerful civil society boycotts against Nestle in 1998 when it was 'irresponsibly' marketing breastmilk substitutes, breaking the international code of marketing of breastmilk substitutes. Society's elephants, NGOs often have a long memory and are not particularly good at forgetting - especially not what big businesses have done. There is little doubt that Nestle has made huge strides forward since 1998, and their work with several prominent civil society organisations demonstrates that. But the thought that they needed to prove to civil society that 'business can be a force for good' is well, about 10 years out of date. Many in civil society are more than happy to admit that - even work very hard to encourage it. Hence - doing business better. Certainly I didn't meet anyone at the conference who was shocked by the notion that business can be a force for good. That's why they were there, doing the work they are doing - to ensure that it does, indeed, do that. Or at least that it does no harm. Nestle might have coined the term 'creating shared value' but the basic notion has been around for as long as has business itself (a point that I am sure they would agree with).If Nestle continues to have these conferences, perhaps in the future, they can learn to give people more chance for interaction (which is where learning tends to happen) and to have the conference itself advance concrete goals - to tackle real problems. Not just 'nutrition' or 'water' - that is too abstract (though better than 'business and society', which is even more abstract)! But rather, here is our policy on 'nutrtion' or here are our challenges in getting better nutrition, what can we do differently? What do you want to learn from us? Or find ways to connect the dots in a creative, interactive fashion that really adds value - not just a bit more information - to the participants and for Nestle. Because the challenges we face are too big to let any opportunity of people gathering together miss the chance to have concrete learning's that we can use in our daily work to do 'business better'. ]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Oil-Damaged-Waters--A-Nigerian-perspective-on-the-Gulf-Spill/14375.htmlSun, 30 May 2010 11:58:08 GMTSara Wolcott Non-Western voices have been, as usual, quite absent from the important conversations on the oil spill in the Gulf. So here is one perspective: that of Ms Uloma Onuma. At the time of our conversation, this young, eloquent (and elegant) change-maker was a researcher in a civil society organization working to bring a green economy fueled on renewable energy for sustainable development to Nigeria.Nigeria has a long and largely troubled (and hardly sustainable-development-orientated) relationship wi Read Full Article ]]> Non-Western voices have been, as usual, quite absent from the important conversations on the oil spill in the Gulf. So here is one perspective: that of Ms Uloma Onuma. At the time of our conversation, this young, eloquent (and elegant) change-maker was a researcher in a civil society organization working to bring a green economy fueled on renewable energy for sustainable development to Nigeria.Nigeria has a long and largely troubled (and hardly sustainable-development-orientated) relationship with oil. 80% of its GDP comes from oil. As international oil prices have risen, Nigeria's GDP has risen steadily. Not surprisingly, when international oil prices fell in 2007 and again with the financial crisis, GDP dropped. Still- don't be fooled by a 'positive' GDP.To say that the government is captured in oil is like saying that fresh water fish are captured by oil spills. The government, despite attempts at recent reforms, is corrupt and notorious for not bringing the oil-profits into the pockets of its citizens.As a result, 70% of the population lives below the poverty line. Their own energy supply is appalling; many businesses have moved to neighboring countries. In 2009, 40 million were unemployed. Further, Nigeria is rated as the world's biggest oil-flarer. In 2004, the World Bank estimated that Nigeria looses about US$2.5 billion annually as a result of the flaring.And Nigeria has had its share of oil spills. Just this month, a Shell Trans Niger pipeline has had leaks and fires. Between 1976 and 1998, 2.5 million barrels of oil were spilled into the Niger Delta. Leaking pipelines that run through villages, farms and creeks are a major source of pollution, sickness and economic ruin. Contaminated fish cause sickness. Minor leaks can run for months. In a desperate attempt of poor people to fight back against the oil-government partnership that rarely serves their needs, they sometimes sabotage the pipes. Because of this, it is not always clear who caused the spills; but it is clear that they are not getting cleaned up, and local communities fear further human rights violations from oil companies and their government-counterparts.So the people of Nigeria know of the horrors of oil spills. Yet the Gulf spill, which has consumed much of Western media, has barely reached the headlines in Nigeria. Most of Uloma's colleagues are concerned with pressing matters at home - the recent death of their president; the energy crisis; the recent Shell spill in their own backyard. Uloma, fortunately for this readership, has a strong interest in global affairs. In addition to feeling great sympathy for the communities and ecosystems of the Gulf regions she is struck at the level of response that this spill has had."There is a strong correlation between the spill in the United States and what we have experienced for years in the Niger Delta, albeit without the same degree of visibility until the militancy and unrest in the Delta. We have had and still have spills that threaten marine life, livelihoods and even the health of people in the Deltas. I was particularly struck by the magnitude of the response measure with the United States President, pledging and giving the support of the military and the deployment by both BP and the US of over a 100 skimming ships - and so much personnel needed for this huge clean up exercise, all (of whom were) deployed almost immediately. This has never happened in Nigeria. A Joint Task Force was set up a few years ago, but only to hunt militants who were agitating against the injustices in the Deltas. BP has accepted liability for legitimate claims - there isn't a way out (in the US). In Nigeria, a way out remains." While many US activists chide Obama for not being stronger with the oil companies and not banning all offshore oil drilling and immediately launching a stronger renewable energy campaign, it is a far cry from what Nigeria has done. So long as 'a way out' remains, sustainable development remains nearly impossible.And then there's technology. She said that "it's fascinating that BP is able to build the dome/containment box at such costs and deploy it in deep sea conditions even though it has never been done before. They have also come up with alternative solutions, in most cases utilizing 2 or 3 options simultaneously: the booms, the robots to deploy the safety valve e.t.c. I liken it to the case of gas flaring in Nigeria, it shows that most of these oil companies have the means and resources to deploy these technologies, why don't they do so in Nigeria?"Good question. Her own answer: "Laws, policies and government laxity. Here, spills are always blamed on vandalization and it takes years - if ever- to complete a cleanup exercise in Nigeria."Uloma's perspective reminds us of the grave discrepencies in what corporations - and, indeed, governments - can get away with in different parts of the world. It suggests the need for global as well as national regulation. More so, it speaks to the real danger of continuing an oil addiction that is damaging people and the planet - the world over.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Show-me-the-money--Illicit-Financial-Flows/15453.htmlMon, 24 May 2010 10:00:38 GMTSara Wolcott Sustainable development- especially reducing poverty - takes funds. Lots of them. Funds for infrastructure, medication, health clinics, and, crucially, for education. And while it looks like many donor countries are going to aim to keep their 0.7% targets for aid - long a goal, almost never a reality - sustainable development could use a lot more. And there's a big pile of money out there, ready for the taking. No, not banker's bonuses - though given that the financial crises has destroyed much Read Full Article ]]> Sustainable development- especially reducing poverty - takes funds. Lots of them. Funds for infrastructure, medication, health clinics, and, crucially, for education. And while it looks like many donor countries are going to aim to keep their 0.7% targets for aid - long a goal, almost never a reality - sustainable development could use a lot more. And there's a big pile of money out there, ready for the taking. No, not banker's bonuses - though given that the financial crises has destroyed much of the gains made in the MDGs over the past several years, those bonuses might well be considered fair game for many a poor African mother looking for funds after her informal sector work dried up due to the Crisis. Illicit financial flows from Africa.Between 1970 and 2008, Africa lost a staggering $854 billion in illicit financial outflows - a figure that could rise to U$ 1.8 trillion or even higher if adjusted to missing data, according to a recently released report by Global Financial Integrity.According to this report, sub-Saharan African countries have experienced the bulk of illicit financial outflows with the West and Central Africa region posting the largest outflow numbers.The financial outflows from the entire region outpaced official development assistance going into the region at a ratio of at least 2 to 1.llicit financial outflows from Africa continue to grow at an average rate of 11.9 percent per yearThese financial flows, which are mainly from Africa to Western countries, are in the forms of mispricing, money laundering, smuggling, and bribery among others but most is tax evasion by corporations. Much of it passes through the global shadow financial system specifically designed to facilitate transactions that shift illicit, unrecorded money across borders.There has been hundreds of billions of dollars flowing out of Africa decade after decade - far in excess of the official development assistance going into African countries.Why is there all this illicit flow out of Africa? The study suggests two factors. One: decolonisation. Two: the continued spread of multinational corporations across the world and other infrastructures which facilitate financial flows across borders.It continues primarily because Western countries have done little to address the problem. There are now more than 60 tax heavens. Compared that to the 1960s when they were about four in the world.What to do? Laws are needed that require financial institutions to demand transparency on actual ('beneficial') ownership. We need country- by- country reporting by companies showing their financial transactions. There needs to be automatic information exchange among tax authorities and harmonisation of anti-money-laundering laws. Raymond Baker, author of the study, said that "All countries should have a common stand on what constitutes accountable money or not, and the proceeds of tax evasion should be declared illegal."If tax payers in the UK or the US want to bring more funds to sustainable development, lobbying for these simple changes would make a significant difference.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Leaders--come-on-down-to-clean-up-your-mess/15461.htmlSun, 23 May 2010 13:52:15 GMTSara Wolcott 'Externalities' is too nice of a word. Human and environmental 'externalities' need to be seen as more than externalities - they are the centre of those people's lives - centralities. The spread sheets of everyone who has used oil to survive are too white and clean to be considered accurate - and that includes yours truly. As Bob Herbert recently said in the NY Times, America is selling its soul for oil. Not only its own soul, but the souls of hundereds of communities around the world who are su Read Full Article ]]> 'Externalities' is too nice of a word. Human and environmental 'externalities' need to be seen as more than externalities - they are the centre of those people's lives - centralities. The spread sheets of everyone who has used oil to survive are too white and clean to be considered accurate - and that includes yours truly. As Bob Herbert recently said in the NY Times, America is selling its soul for oil. Not only its own soul, but the souls of hundereds of communities around the world who are suffering from what Kendra brilliantly calls 'unnatural disasters'. And as she pointed out, its not just an ecological disaster - its entire livelihoods.The environmental catastrophe - 110 neotropical migratory birds are coming - right now - to rest in the wetlands and many of them aren't going to be taking flight again; the oysters, shrimp, and other wetland resources; the sheer physical beauty of mother nature - is very, very large. BP is getting some serious reputation damage as a result of its lack of truthfulnes, humility and humanity. And while they might be deemed responsible for much of it, it is unlikely that their responsibility will be required to stretch to the lives of the people along the coast whose livelihoods are now ruined.Yet the people on the ground are, right now, cleaning up the mess. This seems, at best, unfair and inhumane. Why can't the executives of BP come and clean up with them? And BP is hardly the only culprit. Government does - and probably will - take a lot of the blame. But so too should consumers, the fertiliser companies and auto industry that use the oil, the politicans who set the rules, the civil servants who do the work when the politicans are giving speeches. They should all come down to wetlands and clean up the mess, shoulder to shoulder with the fishermen. It might 'only' be symbolic - it might only be for a day. But it will be humane. And without our humanity, any hope of sustainability is lost.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Beyond-the-MDGs--who-s-watching/15448.htmlSat, 22 May 2010 10:40:56 GMTSara Wolcott Today, when JM's health blogger brought up the example of the eradication of small pox as an example of how 'we can do it' (eradicate major health problems in the fight against poverty) and in the process achieve the Millenium Development Goals - MDGs - it made me think about the current flurry of debates arising around the MDGs. The original goal was that they would be accomplished by 2015. It is now 2010. There is a major UN meeting this coming September - and many, many people are spending a Read Full Article ]]> Today, when JM's health blogger brought up the example of the eradication of small pox as an example of how 'we can do it' (eradicate major health problems in the fight against poverty) and in the process achieve the Millenium Development Goals - MDGs - it made me think about the current flurry of debates arising around the MDGs. The original goal was that they would be accomplished by 2015. It is now 2010. There is a major UN meeting this coming September - and many, many people are spending a lot of time accessing the progress, the point and the impact of the MDGs. Has there been some progress? Sure. Some. Especially thanks to China and India. But it is hard to say that their poverty irradication had much to do with the MDGs.I first came across the MDGs in Kenya. They were stuck on many a wall in many an aid office - a check list of what was needed for a good society. And the posters looked like just that - posters. Nothing more. They didn't feel grounded in Kenyan reality, or in the work that people were doing. Most on-the-ground programme officers I met just shrugged. Sure, we all want lower infant mortality - and those who are smart will link the good work they are already doing for sustainable development to the MDgs, and it will help them get funding. But most poor folks hadn't heard about the MDGs (unless you were in Sachs' Millenium Village). So I felt that they weren't particularly important - indeed, they seemed more annoying than anything else.Research and thinking on the MDGs has tended to be polarized - you either love them or hate them.Until I met Andy Sumner. He's tall, wiry, tons of (often scattered) energy who has mastered multi-tasking, and is wonderfully down to earth. When I said, well, what's the big deal about the MDGs, he looked at me like I was crazy. As he has said, advocates of the MDG approach believe it provides a rallying call for placing multi-dimensional poverty reduction at the centre of development efforts. The MDGs are thus viewed as a set of indicators for guiding poverty reduction and for holding international agencies and governments accountable to citizens.Those less convinced see the MDG approach as a donor-led, reductionist agenda that pays little attention to locally defined and owned definitions of progress and development. Yeah, that would be me. Have the galvanised action? Yes. Have they made a difference? Hard to say. As Andy says, the MDGs are different things to different people. They are a set of indicators, but they are also an idea or 'global norm' for poverty reduction, an incentive structure for pro-poor development and a view of 'development' in themselves. How do (do they?) global agreements and conventions change poor people's lives? The evidence isn't really in yet.But even though the evidence isn't in, one thing is clear - by 2015, the goals won't be fully met. Many advocates prefer not to talk about it - they want the next 5 years to be a 'big push' by donor countries to get those goals met. Andy argues - and I agree with him here - that we need to look beyond these the next 5 years and start talking about what we want to happen next. And in order for that conversation to be successful, we need to include poor people in the discussion - whose voices are what really matters in creating pro-poor sustainable development.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Cleaning-up-your-own-house---when/15322.htmlThu, 20 May 2010 15:55:37 GMTSara Wolcott As the British weather begins to feel distinctly more like summer despite winter's seemingly relentless hold, I'm anxious to get to my spring cleaning. But in the field where I work - international development - I wonder when is the time for a good clean-out, to come to grip with what works and what doesn't, what fits and what doesn't, and to throw out the clothes that no longer work and make way for a lighter and cleaner space to work and to enjoy one's life.The financial crisis of 2008 brought Read Full Article ]]> As the British weather begins to feel distinctly more like summer despite winter's seemingly relentless hold, I'm anxious to get to my spring cleaning. But in the field where I work - international development - I wonder when is the time for a good clean-out, to come to grip with what works and what doesn't, what fits and what doesn't, and to throw out the clothes that no longer work and make way for a lighter and cleaner space to work and to enjoy one's life.The financial crisis of 2008 brought millions more into poverty. It also changed a few of the 'rules' of international development, though the 'new rules' have yet to be fully written. The world is no longer as dominated by the monolithic Western super powers - usually that prize goes to the USA. The President of Uganda, when putting forward Uganda's plan for development emphasized that this is Uganda's plan - and if the Westerners didn't like it, tough luck - besides, they really needed to clean up their own house before going about preaching to other countries how to behave.Any decent practitioner will tell you the same thing - you have to walk your talk. Practice your values - not just preach them. Integrity speaks louder than words. Is your own house in order? Do you really know what you are talking about - through experience? If you speak of transparency, is your organisation transparent? If you talk about interdisciplinary collaboration, are the silos in your organisation working together? If not are you finding ways to enable them to do so? Is your organisation financially healthy - not just on paper, but in people's lived experiences?When speaking to colleagues and partners about international development recently, the comments frequently come back to our own 'mess' - the disorganisation, lack of harmonisation, in-fighting, and the small-worlds in which so many of us move. Of course, if we wait till we are all perfect we won't get anything done - but if we don't clean up the very real challenges in our own organisations, why would people listen to us - much less want to continue working for and with us? The later question might be answered in that people don't know any better - this is generally a sectoral problem more than the problem of any one organisation (especially around financial rewards and retention of best practices and historical lessons). And people often don't listen to us. They may nod and agree - even vehemently - but it's harder to know how often advice is taken. The time to clean up our own house is long overdue.Photo credit: ic.nc.gov]]>http://www.justmeans.com/Forget-me-not/15214.htmlWed, 19 May 2010 13:13:05 GMTSara Wolcott There are those in international development who, when they look at the overall global system, argue that the right macro economic and international trade policies would do far more to enable people to climb out of poverty than community based projects to 'empower people to help themselves.' Many NGOs, in their attempts to be most effective with their resources, are going away from community or local projects and programmes, from schools to health clinics to supporting local governance to move ' Read Full Article ]]> There are those in international development who, when they look at the overall global system, argue that the right macro economic and international trade policies would do far more to enable people to climb out of poverty than community based projects to 'empower people to help themselves.' Many NGOs, in their attempts to be most effective with their resources, are going away from community or local projects and programmes, from schools to health clinics to supporting local governance to move 'upstream' and try to tackle the challenges of development at the level of national policy or at the level of British international, trade or aid policy.Yet at the same time we see the rise of direct giving in a rise of 'people helping people' - individuals in, say, the UK wanting to give directly to individuals in, say, Uganda to support them in building that well/school/irrigation project/school fees. Which one is right? In general, changing the macro-level policies that so often hinders bottom-up style growth and innovation might be in the long run more effective. But this attention misses a - the? - key element of the global development process: the human element.In small towns and villages and even some entire countries around the world, one often encounters people who experience having been forgotten. Aid agencies give money and attention and press to the still-struggling Haiti but ignore the earthquake in Peru, or the deforestation in Brazil (hardly a 'news' story), or the ongoing, never-attended to oil spills in Nigeria that continue to damage the water supplies of people everywhere or the refugees who have been refugees so long that their children have been born, 'educated' and built a meager life for themselves in refugee camps or . Name your forgotten problem of choice. And in those places, the experience of the world having forgotten about you is uite painful, adding to the material and financial pain that they already may be experiencing. Which is not to say everyone feels forgotten or wants to be in connection with the big wide world - some are quite happy to be disconnected from it, others don't know or don't care.But for those who do care and do feel disconnected, that experience is not necessarily solved merely by macroeconomic policies. It might not be helped by an extra goat or a cow. But it can be eased through the intention and the attention on connection, at a very human level, between two people of different cultures and different perspectives: neither has been forgotten by the other. And in doing that, we can continue the long process of repairing some of the damage that our intattention has brought upon us.]]>http://www.justmeans.com/African-Sustainable-Development--Invest-in-Adult-Education/15034.htmlMon, 17 May 2010 06:16:33 GMTSara Wolcott African sustainable development is entirely possible, despite the prevalance of doubters. But it will need to invest in knowledge of all kinds - especially in adult education.Africa - in much of recent development literature, it has been termed not only the dark continent, but the 'forgotten continent' and 'x works everywhere except in Africa'. Some have even had the audacity to claim that if Africa disappeared, no one would notice. One must assume the speaker did not consider the billion-plus p Read Full Article ]]> African sustainable development is entirely possible, despite the prevalance of doubters. But it will need to invest in knowledge of all kinds - especially in adult education.Africa - in much of recent development literature, it has been termed not only the dark continent, but the 'forgotten continent' and 'x works everywhere except in Africa'. Some have even had the audacity to claim that if Africa disappeared, no one would notice. One must assume the speaker did not consider the billion-plus people who live on 20% of the earth's total landmass. The unfortunate perspective that 'Africa can not do develop' seems to be supported by recent historical evidence. But the vast and diverse continent - so culturally, lingusitically, climate and in other respects diverse that it is debatable whether 'Africa' exists as cultural entity - has been at the brunt of much of the worse aspects of overall global development. It suffered at the forefront of Western 'germs guns and steel' as Western expansion and later imperialism and colonialism was at its heights, loosing up to 30% (and in some places, nearly entire villages) to the slave trade. Most African countries have less than 60 years of independence. In more recent years, 'normal' cyclical growth patterns have been met by international financial institutions (ie, IMF) with highly detrimental policies - making difficult times significantly worse. So just because Africa has not 'caught up' as fast as China currently is, one should not assume that it can not do so.One of the great unfortunate challenges of the past 40 years has been the lack of investment in adult and higher education. As climate change begins to take its toll, Africans will need not only far more trees and far less deforestation, they will need better water management practices, agricultural practices, transportation solutions, energy solutions, and other critical services and infrastructure than it currently has. That requires a high level of critical engagement with the issues, the technology, the challenges and with one another. That requires knowledge sharing at a level that has never been attempted anywhere. This level of adaptation is quite difficult without good adult education services including higher education that can connect Africa's intelligentsia - which will greatly inform and shape its politicians, civil service, business leaders and other decision makers in society - with one another, with the wider world and, importantly, with 'local' and community knowledge. It might be argued that this last one has rarely been achieved successfully in the UK; learning how to do so in Africa will take immense social entrepeneurship.Perhaps several decades later than it should have done so, the London School of Economics has recently created an 'African Development' initiative, and Malawian Professor Thandika Mkandawire, an economist who spent enough time in Sweden to pick up a Swedish passport is the new chair. Mkandawire has long been a respected African intellectual himself, and he plans to shape this new initiative to focus on this great need to build Africa's intellectual capacity. The new initiative - and his focus as chair - suggests not only that Africa can develop but that knowledge and higher education needs to be central to its development. This includes investing in higher education - something that has long fallen off the list of priorities in the rush towards primary school education - and encouraging African intellectuals (including their doctors and their nurses) to stay in Africa and not to be pulled into the better paying positions elsewhere in the world. But to face the challenges of sustainable development, African universities will need to not only expand to fit the needs and desires of a growing population and deepen their capacity to educate that population but to work with 'local people' and engage in immense varities of popular adult education regardless of people's literacy levels. And finally, it will need to seriously consider what, exactly, kind of development it wants. Economist Mkandawire has a clear emphasis on economic growth. With much of the Africa's population at levels of extreme poverty, the need for poverty reduction is clearly high, but so too is the need for reducing inequality and creating patterns of development that do not replicate the social and environmental damages that has been done in the US, in China and in India. May African knowledge for sustainable development truly spread - and may the cradle of mankind grow wiser than its neighbors.Photo credit: wabash]]>