The Disposable Lifestyle: How Convenience has Harmed our World.

My first attempt at a video blog. Enjoy!

VLOG – EOI Marketing from Amy Blyth on Vimeo.

Comments Off on The Disposable Lifestyle: How Convenience has Harmed our World. / 16 Jan 2013 por Amy Blyth
IMSD /

Have you done your steak-holder analysis?

Blog post DP4 of 4 for the subject Socio-Economic Development Perspectives

A stakeholder is any person or group with an interest or concern in a particular issue. A stakeholder analysis is the process of identifying those who are affected by a particular issue.

In my previous blogs (DP 1-3) I have provided three examples of unsustainable and unethical industry practices:

DP 1: The meat industries and factory farming: animal cruelty, environmental damage, food waste

DP 2: The chocolate industry and exploitation of raw materials from developing nations: child labor, inhibition of local community development

DP 3: The seafood industry and overfishing: species extinction, environmental damage and the depletion of a critical food resource for millions in developing nations

What I have tried to demonstrate through these examples is the relationship between our consumerism and the wider developmental consequences of something as intimate as our food. In other words, I have tried to show that through our everyday consumer decisions, we are not the only stakeholders in the decisions we make between us and the companies we buy our products from. Rather, ultimately we are stakeholders in the decisions between us and the welfare of others – the welfare of the animals that we use for our food, the welfare of the people who produce our food, the welfare of the people who don’t have enough food and the welfare of our environment and its capacity to sustain future generations. This said, the reality is that the majority of today’s consumers are disconnected and do not see the other stakeholders when walking down the supermarket isle – they only see the cheapest eggs and not the cost-cutting cruelty necessary to make them so cheap – they only see the different flavors of chocolate and not the different standards of economic and social fairness – and they only see the sushi at the end of their chopstick and not the species at the end of the line…

This disconnection between us and where our food comes from is by no means accidental. Societies that pursue economic efficiency and prosperity as the model for development, typically produce consumers who value more for less. And to meet this growing demand of more for less, industries have had to change the way they operate. But here’s the catch, if we knew what industries have typically done to create these economic efficiencies, we probably wouldn’t want to buy the product after all. As a result, companies commonly employ clever marketing strategies to try and hide the reality of their supply chain (i.e. ‘Farm Fresh Eggs’ that really come from a factory, not a farm), or companies simply just deflect corporate responsibility altogether (i.e. the chocolate industry in DP 2).

Industrialization and the impact it has had on sustainable development around the world is not unique to the food industries, for example, the clothing industry and exploitation of labor standards or the chemical industry and toxic pollution. However, given the intimacy and necessity of food, the decisions we make send a message of what type of food systems we want for our future. More importantly, what type of food systems we need in order to feed a growing population and provide food security for those already scrapping the bottom of the barrel.

The question then stands, how can we create food systems that provide enough for everyone, without compromising our environment and disregarding the welfare of other species that we share our planet with?

If we continue up the factory-farming industrial path, I believe we will fail in all aspects of development. Because a society that chooses to exploit and disregards the rights of animals in order to produce it’s food, will probably also continue to view others in its global community who are lower in the social food-chain with the same disdain and controlling mentality.

But what about government intervention, regulation and control? Surely, our governments protects us from buying products that are counterproductive to the goals of sustainable development? Unfortunately, the answer is no, not really – the power of industry and its lobbies combined with governments current focus not to hurt GDP in the name of economic development has left the consumer at the mercy of the market.

The good news is that we don’t need the government to change the way industries operate. Civil society has the potential to take back control of the marketplace, as exemplified in the below three cases:

How we can end factory farming

How we can end exploitation for our chocolate

How we can protect marine species from extinction

In conclusion, it is easy to feel powerless to influence the developmental challenges of our time. Poverty and hunger, child labor, species extinction….but the truth is, we have the power to create change through our consumerism by voting with our fork three times a day. Factory farming doesn’t abuse animals to produce cheap chicken because the law requires them to. They produce cheap chicken because consumers buy it. In this sense, both the problem and solution are in our hands…

At the same time, the reality is that the following conditions need to be present in order for change to occur; a) consumers need to be informed, educated and reconnected to where their food is coming from; b) consumers need to actually care enough about the developmental consequences of their decisions; c) and finally consumers need to be able to economically engage with the products that represent sustainable development – for people living in poverty and suffering from hunger, I imagine their concern is just where their next meal comes from and not how it was produced. To this effect, in the context of global food systems, consumer change will not be effective in isolation. Therefore, the ability for consumers to bring about sustainable global development will only be effective if we can at the same time bring about universal access to education and bring those at the bottom out of poverty. Everything is interconnected. This is my perspective on development.

 

Comments Off on Have you done your steak-holder analysis? / 14 Jan 2013 por Daniel Salter
IMSD /

DP: “Bring diversity back to agriculture”

“Bring diversity back to agriculture. That’s what made it work in the first place” –David R. Brower (Founder of Sierra Club)

How to write this blog post without sounding anti-corporate, anti-growth, anti-modernity and not just straight out hippy blabber?

In my previous blog post I wrote about agriculture and the link to climate change and environmental degradation. While diving deeper into the business of agriculture I discovered the link between agriculture and poverty and especially hunger. How can it be that farmers in the developing world are so poor? Especially, how is it that 50% of the hungry people in this world are small-scale farming households? (To see the data, check out Oxfam’s report: “GROW -Food. Life. Planet” on p.32)

I’ve been searching a lot to try and find an answer but it’s tricky. How is it that the most undernourished people in this world are the people that work in food production?

Instead, I found an array of aspects which overall are contributing to a broken system and leaving people hungry.

It seems that the system is flawed and that governments cannot correct it.

° Four firms control over 50% of the seed industry sales, – that’s Dupont, Monsanto, Syngenta and Limagrain

° Six firms control 75% of agrochemicals

° Montsanto’s annual R&D budget amounts to US$ 1.2 billion.

° The Consultative Group on International Agriculture (CGIAR), the world-leading centre that carries out R&D for developing countries, has an annual R&D budget of US$ 500 million

Naturally, the big agricultural companies research new technologies aimed at their biggest customers, namely the large industrial farms in the developed world. They sell them ready-to-go packages of herbicides together with genetically modified seeds.

The biggest opportunity to increase production and get rid of hunger would be to focus on small-scale farmers’ technology, but money is spent where money will be made and so poor farmers cannot get hold of better practices that would benefit them.

° Cargill, Bunge and ADM control nearly 90% of global grain trade

In order for famers to earn an income they need to be able to sell their surplus. However, it is increasingly difficult for them to have say in a market where middlemen, processors, aggregators, freighting companies, brands and distribution companies are in control.

What’s needed are not  products but technologies of practice – techniques not easily packaged and sold, but which can deliver solutions to stagnating productivity and poor sustainability.

I don’t want to argue that “big is bad” and that the names above are the culprits for all the hungry people in the world. That would be ridiculous and counterproductive towards finding a solution.

But neither can I argue that “big is beautiful”. The idea that one model can be exported to another country and will solve the hunger issue is not just disconnected from social reality but is also bad economics, especially in sub-Saharan Africa where small-scale farming is what so many people rely on as a source of income.

Thus, when talking about sustainable agriculture one should think about more than just ecology or farming methods, and remember the social and economic aspects.

If we need to feed more people then we have to increase our food production. According to DFID, food production in Asia has increased 76% and 28% in Latin America. However, in Africa, food production has decreased, and is at 10% less per person today than in 1960.

So absolutely do we need to increase production, especially in Africa where this is failing. Yet, when thinking about new strategies, we have to remember that agriculture is so much more than just food for humans. It’s so important that we do it right when it comes to agriculture, because, as I wrote before, it’s connected to so many broader issues. The externalities linked to agriculture, positive as well as negative, are more important than the number of tomatoes grown per year. Negative externalities that come with bad agriculture are land degradation, soil erosion, water shortage, loss of biodiversity. These all occur over years and are difficult to factor in and to remedy, when possible

However, there are also positive externalities!

Sustainable agriculture works. It has many functions and works within landscapes and economies. Not only does it produce food for the famers and for the market, but it also gives back a service, such as clean water, groundwater recharge, flood protection as well as maintaining biodiversity and carbon sequestration in soils. It builds natural capital, enforces social capital and helps develop human capacities.

But in order to ensure that we will benefit from positive externalities we need to bring diversity back. “Genetic diversity in crops has been spiraling downwards – some 30 000 varieties of rice were grown in India 50 years ago; now only 10 varieties cover 75% of all the rice-growing area”. (Oxfam, 2011)

Developing agriculture in a sustainable way will ensure that we can feed the future as well as benefit from the positive externalities, such as clean water and greater biodiversity. Will sustainable agriculture be a big economic boom for poor countries? Probably not. It might not directly contribute to economic growth but it will bring people out of poverty, which is the starting point if we want to guarantee people the freedoms they deserve.

 

 

Comments Off on DP: “Bring diversity back to agriculture” / 14 Jan 2013 por Julia Senninger
IMSD /

Environmental and natural resource management slogans

As an interesting exercise that aims to summarize and transmit the knowledge acquired about the main threats of human activity on the environment and its biodiversity, several memorable phrases will be provided in the next weeks.

1 We are part of a whole which is superior to us

Comments Off on Environmental and natural resource management slogans / 14 Jan 2013 por Monica Ducoing
IMSD /

Environmental and natural resource management slogans

As an interesting exercise that aims to summarize and transmit the knowledge acquired about the main threats of human activity on the environment and its biodiversity, several memorable phrases will be provided in the next weeks.

1 We are part of a whole which is superior to us

About the feeling of  superiority, André Kuipers, Astronaut form the European Space Agency states in the latest report of WWF  Living Planet Report 2012 that “ Seeing Earth from space provides a unique perspective. Our planet is a beautiful and fragile place, protected only by a very thin layer of atmosphere essential for life on our planet. And seemingly large forests turned out to be small and passed by very quickly”.

2  Biodiversity: fragile link between the resilience of the environment and the assurance of provision of services

 

Biodiversity certainly plays a key role for both the environment and humans. As stated by WWF report “ All human activities make use of ecosystem services – but can also put pressure on the biodiversity that supports these systems.” This activities include provision for food, timber, fibre, medicines, and cultural services among others.

However biodiversity serves also for regulating services of the environment such as climate, removal of pollutants and waste decomposition, water filtration etc. So if the balance of biodiversity its altered,  the resilience of the environment will be affected and with it the ability to obtain supplies for human consumption threatened.

Furthermore The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB), a global initiative focused on drawing attention to the economic benefits of biodiversity, present in their Ecological and Economic Foundation Report an outline of the relationship between the environment, biodiversity and human well being, describing each of the elements as functions, services, benefits and value (economic). It is worth-nothing the introduction of institutions and human judgment as key elements for making decisions about the use and management of resources and thus the maintenance or restoration of the environment and biodiversity.

 

 

3  Pollutants and Waste: Its severity and irreversible impact on our ecosystem

4 Natural Resource Management is about social choices!

5 Ensure environmental and social progress through certified products… Make a choice!

6  A certification system is a step to assure sustainability

Comments Off on Environmental and natural resource management slogans / 14 Jan 2013 por Monica Ducoing
IMSD /

DP: Giving voice to vulnerable communities

I recently read in the paper by Mary Myers Is There a Link Between Media and Good Governance? a phrase by Amartya Sen: “A free press has an important protective function in giving voice to the neglected and the disadvantaged, which can greatly contribute to human security”. This created an special interest to me since in my country, Mexico, there are dozens of vulnerable populations in which capital income is extremely low, the living conditions are not safe neither stable, and where the dialogue with the authorities and the rest of civil society is only possible through media.

However, as I stated in previous texts, as well as there are certain conditions that ensure access to information for the population there are also conditions on which a media outlet is able to inform and give voice to its people.

The role of community radio

In the context of vulnerable populations, at least in Mexico, it seems to me there is no better answer among the existing media, than community radio. According to the World Association of Community Radio in Mexico (AMARC-MX), community radio “are those stations that emerge from the community to serve the community and have community engagement in the ownership of the media, as well as in programming, management, operation, financing and evaluation. There are nonprofit independent media […] and have as core work to support local social development processes and human rights. ”

Community radio is a vital tool for the sustainable development of indigenous and other vulnerable populations given its capabilities and technical facilities, because it is relatively easy to get a signal within the radio frequency. Also, due to its ability to reach large segments of the population on a low cost both for transmission and reception and because of the nature of the medium that allows a large volume and depth of information, tailored to the needs of certain human groups such as their language, educational level and intrinsic requirements for development.

Due to its communal nature and low budget as well as an unfortunate legislation that exists in Mexico, which has favored for many years high concentration of media ownership, community radio stations are in a high vulnerable situation because of their “non regulated” status. Also, for the past several years, there have been acts of violence against them not only by government agencies but by other stakeholders and even organized crime.

Why? Because it is these people who are the most susceptible to the interests of political and social groups that constantly offer capital and material resources in the name of development, seeking other real interests such as acceptance for support in a given movement or even a vote in the election.

In this case, and being aware of the implications of an assumption like this, it seems that misinformation is an advantage for some of these groups, thereby achieving greater manipulation of populations.

Proof of this is the report of the AMARC-MX, Status of Community Radio in Mexico, stating that “Since June 2008 to December 2011, we have documented a toughening in government persecution against radios operating without permission. The Mexican government, through the Federal Telecommunications Commission (Cofetel), the Ministry of Interior (SEGOB) and the Attorney General’s Office (PGR), have sent Federal Police squads with over 100 elements to close radios, some less than 5 watts where there were only five people, including women and children. These facts constitute excessive use of police force. In addition to these human rights violations criminal proceedings against members of the community radio have initiated … ”

 

It is definitely a situation of concern, not only because of the violence and violation of human rights itself, but because these events have limited the capacity and the existence of community radio, along with other independent media, to serve populations in most critical situations within the country.

 

The formula to underdevelopment

Poor legislation on telecommunications + non guarantee on safety + government agencies attacks

=

lack of independent media + absence of other truthful and available media

=

lack of value information to vulnerable populations + poor livelihoods

=

lack of good governance

 

While it is difficult to contemplate the existence of an underdevelopment condition, it is possible to perceive a clear lack of good governance and therefore a major limitation for civil society to participate actively in the activities of the State, in terms of transparency, accountability, freedom and equity. Under this circumstances, its virtually impossible to create conditions in a community for any sustainable development scenario such as poverty eradication, increase in literacy rate, environment conservation, gender equality, decrease in economic inequality, increase in the state of peace, guarantee of basic goods and sustainable livelihoods.

“Free and independent media in turn enable people to participate in the governance process by providing them access to adequate and credible information about government activities, and by giving them a vehicle through which they can make their input into decision-making” says Edetaen Ojo, in the paper Should media mirror society or shape it? *

So even though the formula to achieve good governance and thus the community development (along with many other factors) is not complete and in an ideal state, the government should at least guarantee the existence of independent uncensored media and specifically community radio. This implies the cease of attacks and beyond, the protection of the media form other external offenders such as organized crime, political groups and other media groups.

This way a flow of information to the community is ensured, but moreover an open space is provides in order to fight “the exclusion of the less favored voices of society and the speeches of the historically marginalized sectors” as said by the AMARC-MX.

 

*For more information look at: Media and Good Governance, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2005.

 

Comments Off on DP: Giving voice to vulnerable communities / 14 Jan 2013 por Monica Ducoing
IMSD /

Environment and natural resources management – A sentence for each session

Sustainability is about equilibrium. About finding a way of growing that combines economic, social and environmental issues. As a psychologist, I have always been more involved in the social side of this triangle, but to really create a sustainable development, environment has to be considered just as important and the other two. What sentence would sum up what I feel about this topic after session one of our natural resources management?

“Nature has its way, and our actions have to adapt to that fact”

Session 2: “It takes nothing to destroy something that needed thousands and thousands of years to be created”

Session 3: “In order to create real sustainable development we need to include all the variables: social, economical and environmental. There is an urgent need for a common languaje between these three sectors, better standards shared and understood by every steakholder”

Session 4: “Human capital is and incredible force to change reality. Including humans in nature namagement through partipative approaches is key for a real sustainable future”

Session 5: “We are playing with fire with the environment. Effective regulation a solid political will  are needed, otherwise we will get burnt”

Session 6:” Well systemized certification schemes, that include all steakholders, are the first step: A common language to work with”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments Off on Environment and natural resources management – A sentence for each session / 14 Jan 2013 por Paloma Andres Urrutia
IMSD /

DP 5.- Evaluation and psycological variables that affect the PC

Step 4.- The Evaluation

Evaluation should be about the impact of our actions, but very often and due to transparency, as I said in the previous step, it is only about showing that you did what you said you were going to do. Very often it also becomes as a matter or money: you evaluate if the money was spent in the activities designed.

The evaluation of a project is nowadays a step that all organizations care about. The criticism about the efficiency of international development has been put into that stage of the cycle, and every organization is increasing their efforts for a good evaluation. I think this stage is going in the right path, but I think that the same amount of effort should be put in the other stages, because the only way to make sure that a project is well evaluated, is to develop the project properly.

Some psychological variables that should be considered when designing a project cycle:

1.- Self esteem: Self esteem is one of the most important variables of any human. I doesn´t have to correspond to the reality, it is made out of perceptions, and sometimes a person that is very capable and has low self esteem wont be able to develop a task only because of this perception. When we work with recipients, do we have esteem in consideration? It is not good for esteem when some outsider comes to your community to tell you that THEY are here to bring the solution to YOUR problems. And this happens every day in development. The participatory approach should be not only to work with real problems, but to make sure that the recipients feel empowered to change the reality.

2.-. Motivation: Are we sure that the recipient are motivated for the project we have? Even if they have identified the problem, do they have the drive to work in it? Projects should be able to find the motivation behind the recipients, but not many incorporate this kind of research in the identification. Finding the motivation of a person is always the key for action, and the development projects should give this variable the importance it has and include motivation surveys in their tools. Using the Maslow´s Pyramid of needs seems like a good beginning.

3.- The reinforcements: Long term reinforcements are not very usefull. If a community is working in a project that will bring them results after 4 years, the chances of abandoning the process before the goal is reached are really high. Short term reinforcement have to be included in the projects, and every effort should be rewarded. The behavioral theory of Successive Approximation Model has years and years of research about how human learn a behavior through rewarding behaviors that come closer to the conduct you are looking for. These kind of theories should be used in development projects, and they are used in many occasions, but not in a conscious level. Bringing human science to development seems to me like a good idea to improve the project cycle.

4.- The concept of Learned Helplessness: This psychological concept shows how a person can learn to feel helplessness. When a person feels that, no matter how hard they work, no matter what they do, the situation never changes, there is a natural process of conditioning that links these two circumstances, leading the person to learn that there is nothing that can be done to change a problem. Some developmental projects make helplessness individuals all around the world. Expectatives are not well managed, and a project that has been poorly planned and fails, can make a recipient think that the solution is impossible.

How to induce learned helplessness

As a conclusion for my DP Blog: There are many variables that should be considered in order to improve the project cycle. The developmental tools need to be more open, and social and human sciences have something to say. Every step of the process must include psychological biases, we have to feel more humble about the tools we have developed and ensure that the process itself is in a continuous path of improvement.

There are still many things to improve in our sector, even in a “common sense” tool like the Project Cycle. Because, after all, like the proverb says: “The common sense is the less common of all the senses”

Comments Off on DP 5.- Evaluation and psycological variables that affect the PC / 13 Jan 2013 por Paloma Andres Urrutia
IMSD /

DP 4.- Ok, we have a project: how do we implement it?

Step 3.- The implementation

Implementing a development project is not a piece of cake. There are many things that do not occur as planned and many things from the design have to change in order to adapt to the reality. The designed plan is a document that needs to be alive, that has to change when it is needed but sometimes this is not possible. Why? I have summarize 3 reasons that in my opinion are responsible for a bad implementation:

1.- The importance of the field: Projects need a person permanently testing the project advances in the place where the project is being implemented. The person in the field is the key to changing decisions, and the opinion of this person has to be very considered. Sometimes these projects are implemented from the headquarters of an organization, and the reality is only tested when there is a trip to the area of the project. It is very easy to make a person think that a project is going as planned on a short monitoring trip and the reality can be distorted.

The field is to me the most important part of a project. After all, it is the place where reality has to change. After living for 7 years I the field, I have seen how projects were not well executed, and I have felt very frustrated when my opinions were not listened. Every project needs a person permanently in contact with the recipients, working hand on hand. The responsible of the project is the field has a very important voice that needs to be heard, and if the project needs changes, the design should be changed.

2.- The money and the donor: Donors don´t like changes of plans. When an organization has designed a plan, it is very important for them to make sure that the plan has been followed step by step, and sometimes a change of plans can result on big problems, even if the change is needed to get the objectives. Some agencies need to be asked for every little thing you want to change in a project, and the answer can take months due to bureaucracy. Some NGOs don´t want to change anything from the logic framework because they know they will be punished by their donors, but, how can you work with a living organism without a plan that doesn´t adapt? Flexibility is a very important tool for good results, and changing things should be a possibility. But, do we make the changes we need if we feel that we will be punished with less funding in the future due to the changes? Do we make the changes we need if we don’t have enough money to support them?

3.- The apparent transparency of the plan: The fear of changes in a  plan does not lead to good results but there is a tendency to believe that transparency is shown only when you have followed every step of the plan you prepared. I have seen myself afraid of changing an activity because it could look from the outside as a bad distribution of the money. Transparency should be about not being afraid of making changes and being able to explain in every moment the reasons behind the changes. Transparency is to make public why you made a decision, not about being able to stick to the plan.

The implementation of a project should be all about finding solutions, and the project cycle and the logical framework are just tools that need to adapt to the evolution of a process.

Are the tools we use flexible enough to rech our goals?

 

4 comentarios / 13 Jan 2013 por Paloma Andres Urrutia
IMSD /

DP 3.- And the cycle goes on: Project Design

Step 2.- Design of the intervention

Once the problem has been identified, the next step is to define the project that will fix it. As I said, sometimes the program has been designed before, even if it was made in a subconscious way.

During the design of an intervention there is a tendency to split the different sectors on it. I will try to explain what I mean with a real example of a project:

During the visit of a very important politician from an European country, a Central American government decided to show her the dump of the capital city, a place where many people work and live from the garbage. The habitants had built houses out of trash and the kids played and ate in one of the most unhealthy environments one can imagine, an image that is sadly too common in many countries. The politician, really shocked with this visit decided to “do something” and told the development agency of her country to implement a project in this areas. The agency designed a project that covered, between others, 2 areas:

–          Environmental: The dump would be covered to prevent contamination

–          Educational: the habitants would have help to adapt to the new conditions

These 2 areas were split between different organizations and businesses. An engineering firm was put in charge of covering the dump. Some education ngos were put in charge of an educational campaign that would help kids and adults to adapt to the new situation. Every organization started their work independently, and the design of the project was made separately for every objective.

As a result of this independent planning many problems occurred. Does it take the same amount of time to cover a dump than to change the habits of thousands of people that had been living in the dump for years? Of course not. After 6 months the dump was covered, but the educational ngos didn’t have time to change the habitants’ mindset in that short period of time. The habitants of  the dump found out that the place where they had lived and worked for years was suddenly closed, and many social problems, new problems that had never occurred before, started to raise.

In my opinion, only multidisciplinary planning is the key to good planning. All the different actors have to plan together to get good results. If the 2 organizations could have worked together with the same plan, covering the dump would have started only when the community was ready for it. But separated tasks of the same project created a really bad situation.

Social and psychological problems take a long time to change. This is called the “evolutive process” meaning that people need the time they need to adapt to a new situation. Sometimes it is just a matter of time, these processes can´t be rushed. A good example of it is aging: a person who is 15 years old won´t be able to act as a person who is 20, no matter how many manuals they read or how many workshops they attend. The evolutive process needs to be respected when working with people, and every action should put people first.

Multidisciplinary teams should plan a project together, and all the experts from different fields have to be considered equally important in the process. Otherwise, fixing a problem can become the beginning of a new one.

Do we plan in multidisciplinary teams to be able to consider all the variables that can affect a project? Are all variables equally considered?

Comments Off on DP 3.- And the cycle goes on: Project Design / 13 Jan 2013 por Paloma Andres Urrutia
IMSD /