DP 1: The Chicken or its Egg

What came first…the chicken or the egg?

According to Mahatma Gandhi, “the greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”

So if we consider Gandhi’s view on development, it seems that the chicken itself should come first and what it produces is secondary to the way that the chicken is treated.

This is in stark contrast to the reality of modern industrial factory farming practices where how much and how fast an animal produces is the priority and how the animal is treated has seemingly fallen off the moral radar.

A trend I have noticed from the discussion in our Development Perspective course, is that over recent history, there has been a gradual broadening of society’s moral scope. Historically, at the centre of morality, was those who believed that they conceived (i.e. controlled) notions around morality. In other words, white imperialistic men controlled who or what would be considered moral enough to be given rights. However, we have seen this moral scope slowly broaden to include ‘the others’ who have also been issued some form of rights to varying extents. For example, decolonization and the right to independence, abolishment of slavery, women’s rights, ethnic and indigenous rights and gay rights.

So, it seems that as societies develop they tend to be more morally inclusive of ‘the others’ who were traditionally marginalized and exploited. What is it about the nature of development that enables those with power to often loosen their domination over ‘the others’ and to subsequently issue them with the provision of rights? What is it that makes a society question its moral? Is it because of high quality education systems, strong economic and democratic development or an active civil society?

More specific to my area of interest and passion, how do animals and the environment fit into our moral development trajectory?

If moral development is commonly associate with the traditional key developmental indicators (such as GDP growth, democracy and education) then how do we explain the existence of practices such as factory farming in the so called ‘developed countries’?

Factory farming is an expression of one species exploitation, and complete domination over another living species.

There is of course major and important differences between humans and animals which distinguish the concept of human rights and animal rights. At the same time, should the notion of rights that a living being is entitled to be based on their relative intelligence to us, or their ability to suffer? If it is their ability to suffer, to feel distress, to feel fear, to feel pain and misery, then in my opinion, factory farming represents a complete disregard of life’s essential rights. Practices such as factory farming therefore represents a huge regression in human moral development. The question then stands, has something gone terribly wrong with our progression of moral development or are there some other factors about the way industrial societies now operate that is facilitating the existence of industry practices around the world that disregard animals and our environment?

This video from Animals Australia, an animal welfare organization, provides some insights into the the issue of factory farming:

Click here to view the embedded video.

While I won’t be able to explain how pigs fly in that video, in my next blogs, I will look to unpack the issues of human development and agriculture, environmental destruction, animal welfare, food distribution, consumerism and the relationship between them all.

But for now, here are some compelling quotes from the above video…as they say, just some food for thought:

“cheaper (animal products) means crueler”

“according to the UN, raising animals for food, contributes more to climate change than all of the world’s trains, planes and automobiles combined…not to mention water pollution, species extinction, and almost every other major environmental threat”

“the reality is, factory farms use more food than they produce, which means less food for everyone else. At a time when globally, more than one billion people are suffering from malnutrition, one third of the worlds edible cereal harvest is being fed to farm animals…that cereal would be enough to feed around three billion people”

“around the world, consumer choice is driving change”

Thanks for reading…and stay tuned for more blog posts coming soon…

2 comentarios / 27 Nov 2012 por Daniel Salter
IMSD /

The beginning of a personal journey: Common Welfare Economy

After a little over a month in the IMSD program, I have had the chance to learn about many different subjects, get closer to countries I barely knew existed and get to know people from all over the world. I decided to join the program because I felt like “something was missing” in my life, both at a personal and a professional level. The journey has just began, but I already feel like I’m on the right track.

 

 

I have come across a huge amount of information in class and this has definitely changed the way in which I filter external information. Some things have just passed by, but I feel like some others are meant to stay with me forever, in one way or another. One of those things I came across by pure chance, while watching TV one random evening, is the initiative of the Common Welfare Economy, which I would love to share with all of you.

Here you can find the recording of the TV show I saw on October 29th, a moment that definitely had a high impact in me and that I hope you enjoy (truly sorry, it’s only available in Spanish):

 

• La ‘Economía del Bien Común’ según Christian Felber

 

The first thing we talked about in our Development Perspectives class was the definition of development. “[…] a strong, dynamic, open and growing global economy”, “[…] advancing the richness of human life rather than the richness of the economy in which human beings live, which is only a part of it”, “expanding the choices people have to lead lives that they value”, “promoting environmental rehabilitation and empowering people to do things for themselves”, “a change for good”…We also learned that adding the sustainability ingredient in the mix brings these concepts to a whole different level that entails a balance among social, sustainable, environmental, equitable, economic, viable and/or bearable issues.

Only by reviewing these first definitions and approaches, I can already tie them to the rationale behind the Common Welfare Economy. This is a new economic model that pretends to be a true alternative to the current global predominant economic system. I think it’s helpful to understand this initiative to know some of its main premises that I will now just briefly review, but that I plan on analyzing in detail in coming posts:

–        The cornerstones for this movement are the collectively shared values of confidence building, cooperation, appreciation, democracy and solidarity, which allow the fulfillment of interpersonal relationships in order to reach happiness and leverage motivation

–        The over-valued principles of competition and profit-eagerness should be changed for those of cooperation and the pursuit of the common good through new regulatory incentives (shift from valuing financial profit to valuing the effects on common welfare)

–        Need for common welfare to be defined through a participatory “bottom-up” process, to be taken by an economic constitutional convention that is elected democratically and to be included in the constitution through a referendum

–        New balance sheet to measure how companies adhere to social, ecological, democratic and solidary principles (the more adherence, the higher the common welfare score will be)

–        The higher such score is, the better legal advantages the companies receive in terms of taxes, loans, research grants, etc.

–        Capital is no longer a means, but an ends to increase the common good (profits to be used in social/ecological investments, distributed to employees, etc. instead of investments in financial markets)

–        By removing profit as the main objective, companies will not fear competition and will not aim at growing at any cost

–        Inequality in income and wealth will be limited through fixed amounts (for instance, a cap on individual wealth at 10 million or on maximum salaries at 20 times the minimum wage) and surpluses used as democratic endowments distributed to next generations

–        Companies over 250 employees will be partially owned by employees and the public while companies over 5.000 employees will be fully owned by employees and the public. Also, the government will not control public companies.

–        Democratic Commons: enterprises that will offer services of general interest such as education, health, social welfare, mobility, energy, communication and banking

–        New subjects should be taught in schools, such as values and ethics, communication, democracy, nature and environmental education, etc.

–        Need for new leadership skills adapted to this new philosophy (social responsibility, competence, empathy, compassion, etc.)

This is a lot of food for thought – much to digest, but delicious -, but already provides a hint on the wide scope and tremendous implications of this initiative with regards to global sustainable development. For me, it’s clear that we have to do something, we have to act before it’s too late, and this theory, undoubtedly, is a great starting point. I’ll keep on digging into the model to analyze all these aspects and will share my reflections with all of you.

Hope that you join me in this journey, enjoy it with me and share your questions, ideas or concerns meanwhile. Your insights will be greatly appreciated!

 

 

 

Comments Off on The beginning of a personal journey: Common Welfare Economy / 26 Nov 2012 por Sara Gil Vacas
IMSD /

DP: GENDER VIOLENCE AND DISCRIMINATION IN COLOMBIA

When talking about development, it is necessary to address the issue of gender violence and discrimination. In this case when I´m talking about gender is in reference to women discrimination specifically.

The reason I chose this topic is because of my working experience coming from a country, where discrimination and violence against women is something that you can see every day. In this post I´m just going to give some general information about the situation in Colombia regarding discrimination and violence and their relation with the lack of education especially for the poorest people.

From my point of view there is no real development in any country if women don´t get the same opportunities as men do. In many developing countries, women are the engine of the community they live in. They take care of the kids and some of them even work in more than one part time job to bring some money home. All of this jobs are poorly paid and in many cases women can´t find a better and more secure job, because they didn´t even finish middle school and some of them didn´t have any education at all. This can be happening because of cultural issues as well as lack of solid government policies.

During the past two years I worked in an NGO whose purpose is to help build a life project to mistreated women in Bogotá. While working there I realized that about 60% of the women that came to us, didn´t finished high school and  40% didn´t even finish fifth grade, because they had to start working at early ages to support their families, normally on rural areas. Then they got married and started having kinds and became stayed at home mums with an average of 4 kids each, living in really poor conditions and depending only on their partner´s income to maintain the household. Many of these families were forced to move from rural areas into the cities, because of the violence of the guerillas in some parts of the country.

This new and imposed situation changes completely the dynamic of the household, forcing both parents to look for any kind of job to support the family. These kind of situation creates a lot of stress and drives people to become aggressive with their partners or kids, especially when the economic situation is critical or when the women are the ones bringing more money than the man. According to Colombia Reports about 60% of the women who are victims of some kind of domestic violence, reported some kind of income. This study also says that this kind of violence is due to the culture of machismo that is still predominant in some areas of the country.

In this cases violence occurs because of the lack of tools and knowledge of how to deal with the problems in a different way, because of the bad public education system and the different cultural values among regions.

There are lots of cases that don´t get reported because of fear of some kind of retaliation from the partner or lack of information on how to report them properly.

From my point of view, a country like Colombia that has a growing economy and good international investment perspectives, should not only focus on economic development, because as I said at the beginning,  for me the real development only comes when the economic and the social aspects are balanced.

 

 

Comments Off on DP: GENDER VIOLENCE AND DISCRIMINATION IN COLOMBIA / 26 Nov 2012 por Juliana Mejia Mari-o
IMSD /

BUENAS!

Hello everyone!

Welcome to by first blog! Ever.

Yes, I have never blogged before so this will be an interesting journey to say the least. Personally, I have nothing against it, I’m actually a bit more intimidated by the idea of posting my thoughts online for the world to read and comment on.  However, I’m looking forward to coming out of my shell and sharing my thoughts and ideas with you.

Insert inspirational quote of choice about either leaving your comfort zone or trying new things.

Let’s talk about me a bit, but I promise to only highlight the important things that have brought me to where I am right now, EOI.

I was born in Argentina but moved to South Florida when I was eight years old. I had a major live change at such a young age, and I believe it to be the point in my life that has brought me to where I am today. My interests were shaped by the opportunities I was given.

I went to college at Virginia Tech (Go Hokies!) where I studied International relations and also where I was first introduced to environmental sustainability.  After my sophomore year, I went back to Florida to begin an environmental sustainability internship with the PepsiCo Headquarters for Latin America. I continued to work each summer with them until I graduated and they offered me a long-term internship that lasted 8 months. I owe all my knowledge of this subject to this job and the people I had the pleasure to work with throughout the years. While still working there, I was inspired to seek a masters that could teach me more about sustainable development but also corporate responsibility, since it was the CR part that I was so involved with throughout some projects we developed in Latin America.  Before I knew it, I had landed on the IMSD program at EOI.

Fast-forward a couple of months.

October 22, 2012:  I attended my first class at IMSD and met a wonderfully driven group of people who are just as eager as me to learn about sustainability and to carry it out in their personal and professional lives.  Perfection.

 

Comments Off on BUENAS! / 26 Nov 2012 por Micaela Rossetti
IMSD /

DP: What is the role of women in development theories

What is Development?

… expanding the choices people have to lead lives that they value.

UNDP Human Development Report

 

I would not answer the title question through this post but it is a way for me to raise my concern about the nowadays situation of women inside of our system but also my reflexion on this situation in the OECD countries.

According to the above quote that we saw at class (one of multitude definitions of development), my feeling is that it is still a group of people who are not always allowed to choose or don’t have the capacity to choose even in our so-called “developed” countries. The group of people is the women but I would like also to add as a variable education. In my opinion, if we want to change our system of values, education is the first step – but what kind of education-.

However, I would like to focus more here in the case of women. In my opinion, in most of case women are not considered as part integral of the society. Patriarchal system, political decisions or traditions still conditioned the role of women in the society. In my opinion, the gender issue is still considering a question for the feminists and I think it is an error, it might be a concern for the whole society.

Women have to struggle with different inequality and violence depending of where they are living and the position they have. You have explicit inequality like the physical violence but also the implicit way of inequality such as differences in the wages, the role of a women in our society, the double work (domestic unpaid work), under-representation in political and companies in high positions or the minimizing of the role of women in the society.

Another idea that I find interesting is that women are still dependent of the market situation, they are considering as an instrument for the market, – an idea from the Professor Silvia Federeci during the presentation of her book “Calibán y la bruja. Mujeres, cuerpo y acumulación originaria”, where I attended by chance-.

To return back to the title of the post, I make a similar reflexion with the development theories. We see that gender ‘s criteria are always included in index to measure the development of a country or in programmes to fight poverty such as the Millenium development goal. However, most of known theories of development have not taken in account gender concept in a concrete and deep analysis, – despite creation of institution focus on women such as UN Women-. I am conscious that now in development programs and index to measure it, you have the gender criteria but I have still the feeling there is a lack of serious awareness of this topic. In a perfect world we might talk about population and its condition to measure how “healthy” is a country.

I am not a specialist in gender issue but feminist theories have dealt with this topic in multitude aspects, but why we find almost only this this topic behind feminist theory and why not to include as a transversal variable in every general theories of development or in critics of our system –and further I would like also question the social movement.

However, I think that the situation of women is still weak and in the countries where they reach some equity the situation is taking step backward. So could we think if there have been real advances in how the women are considered or just some advances to content the progressive women?

To conclude, I would like to link this part with education issue. I remember that in the first class I chose the picture of a girl who was reading and I did the association between women and education. Again, with what I have seen in our classes and what is happening outside in the “real world”, the changes should come from people, so education is the basis. There is again another debate of what kind of education.  And finally of course, this post is a personal reflexion and not an academic work.

Comments Off on DP: What is the role of women in development theories / 26 Nov 2012 por Stephanie Barrial
IMSD /

DP: Climate change and human development

I would like to share my first thoughts and impressions after almost a month of deep diving into different and interesting topics, like the corporate responsibility, renewable energy, innovation, social entrepreneurship and several sustainable development issues.

I have been thinking of opening the discussion on the main challenges the developing countries are facing, like the lack of the community participation in the development plans and projects (sadly I personally experienced it during my trips to Tanzania while collaborating with different non-profit associations) or the consequences of a system based on different types of aid (Dambisa Moyo, on her book Dead Aid, 2009, explains her point of view about the creation of dependency and the negative aid effect on the African economic development).

However last week the World Bank published the report Turn down the Heat. Why a 4 C° warmer World must be avoid realized by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and Climate Analytics and its alarming contents suddenly grabbed my whole attention and pushed me to direct the conversation towards the big challenge both the developed and developing countries have to face: the Climate Change.

I am going to describe how the current situation looks to my eyes at the moment and I will re-evaluate this issue in a few of months from another perspective and with a broader knowledge of the concept of development.

Before discussing about this urgent matter let’s see how climate change is linked to the sustainable development area.

Terms like growth, economic growth and progress are always mentioned in any kind of discussion, especially at this very moment in such a crisis period. The different economic measures and the business strategies are always driven to reach a certain development, human or business related. But what is development? I believe the best definition is “A change for good”, given by Robert Chambers (Development Studies Professor) and in order to have positive effects, development needs to be sustainable. Sustainability means balance, it is the equilibrium between the society, the economy and the environment and should be the priority number one in any kind of topic.

Sadly I believe profitability instead has been since ever the number one priority. The globalization and the capitalism have driven the world to this risky situation and now that people see the real effects of decades of uncontrolled production and consumption, they start to think about it. The profitability have pushed companies and government to become modern, industrialized and more developed but the most industrialized countries are the one emitting the biggest quantity of greenhouse gases that lead to the global warming.

In addiction the world population keeps growing, in the next 40 years there will be 2.3 extra billion people, with a total of 9 billion human beings living on the same planet, pushing consumption up and squeezing the last drops of the natural resources. The population will grow more in the regions least able to handle it (especially Africa) and the climate change consequences will affect more the same regions, like a vicious circle.

Here it is possible to see the current world population, it is really impressive..

The World Bank report states the world is dangerously getting to 4 C° global warming by the end of the century and describes the alarming consequences.

A drastic environmental change is expected and the possible effects would include extreme heat waves, the extinction of several ecosystems like the coral reef, draught and ice melting. Scientists are even not sure if the human body would be able to handle the extreme temperatures. The agricultural system would be affected the most and the developing countries will need to face an even bigger challenge than the current one, while poverty will proliferate even more. According to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) report greenhouse gas emission levels are around 14% above the risky level at the moment and in 2020 the emission would probably reach 13 billion metric tons above the level needed to limit global warming to 2 C°. In addition China and India economies are expected to double in the next ten years and what would be the effect on the climate if the population demand will not be met by sustainable policies and measures, like renewable energy, recycling and ad hoc water management?

Even if the future doesn’t look that bright as I wish, I believe it is still possible to do something and it is necessary to take an action soon, a change is needed and for good!

In 2010 the International Energy Agency has published a “solutions guideline” with several recommendations aimed to keep the warming at least below 2°C. These measures include renewable energy implementation: wind power (on shore and off shore), hydropower dams, geothermal and biomass energy; more efficient buildings, residential and commercial buildings are accounting for 32% of the total energy used around the world; nuclear power, according to the IEA the world’s nuclear power capacity should double by 2025 in order to meet the climate targets; cleaning up coal plants, in order to meet that 2°C climate target the countries around the world should have at least 38 coal plants by 2020, capturing and storing the carbon.

So everybody keeps talking about climate change issue, the governments and the society itself are aware of the current alarming situation, researchers are presenting to the world several options aimed to improve the current situation and to reduce the GHG emissions and why nobody takes action? Why despite of the alarming warnings more then 1000 new coal-fired power plants are being planned around the world, the majority in two countries not affected by the cap and trade system: China and India? Why despite the fact coal plants are the ones that pollute more, the coal trade keeps growing (coal use increased by 4% in 2011 and coal trade by 13% in 2010)? Why while someone advises to do something clever someone else just does the opposite?

I believe the answer is given by another question: does Economic Growth mean Development?

Amartya Sen Indian-Bengali economist, in his book Development as a freedom talks about the development “as expansion of the real freedoms and capabilities that the people enjoy and that lead them to life a live that they value”. According to Sen a more people-centered model is needed and the human and social development indexes need to be considered too while talking about a nation development.

The economic development instead has the economy, therefore the money, at the center. Our capitalistic society is driven by the profitability, business interests come first and as a consequence the countries continue to be aggressively focused on increasing their production (without caring about the environment), deforestation is still going on and the ultimate goal is always to increase the GDP, mirror of the wealth of a nation.

I personally believe people are the wealth of a nation instead and because of this the massive change needed at this moment should start at a personal level.

I believe that a sustainable development is possible and should be part of the “business as usual” strategy of a company and also part of each individual single choice. Years of globalization drove the society in the wrong track, in a production-consumption path where most of the people believe happiness lies behind richness. Every single individual should therefore take a breath, think and start changing the old and wrong habits while considering the environment effects. Fair trade, proper water and electricity consumption, car sharing and controlled waste are few aspects that should be part of the everyday life. Those behavioral changes would positively affect the global issue of the climate change while having a positive outcome on the human and social development.

I strongly believe the solution of this dramatic moment lies behind the importance of having the people and their quality of life at the center of any development study.

Till when the society will place the economy instead, it would be really hard to change the path.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments Off on DP: Climate change and human development / 26 Nov 2012 por Veronica Recanati
IMSD /

DP: Microfinance and its Increasing Popularity

About a year ago, I was first introduced to the idea of microfinance through the website Kiva.org. I was fascinated by the idea and inspired by the organization. In fact, last year instead of purchasing Christmas presents for my family members, I donated $100 to the Kiva website and my family and I chose entrepreneurs from the website to invest in.

The idea of directly investing in an entrepreneur’s personal development from halfway across the world was something really exciting. As my parents themselves are entrepreneurs, they liked the idea that they were not “donating” money, but rather “investing” in fellow entrepreneurs. It is not a donation, it is a loan; this is not only important for us, but is also important for the borrowers. They are improving their own economic situation.

As Jessica Jackley, co-founder of Kiva, explains in her TED Talk, when she went to Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania:

I never once was asked for a donation, which had kind of been my mode, right. There’s poverty, you give money to help — no one asked me for a donation. In fact, no one wanted me to feel bad for them at all. If anything, they just wanted to be able to do more of what they were doing already and to build on their own capabilities.  Because the best way for people to change their lives is for them to have control and to do that in a way that they believe is best for them.

The idea of being able to allow people to improve their own lives, in their own manner, was what really attracted my family and I to microfinance.

My family and I lent $50 to two borrowers in Kiva last Christmas.

My mother has become especially passionate about choosing the new borrowers; she loves participating in the experience. People from all over the world have become very involved in their Kiva experiences. They share their excitement via social networks like Facebook and Twitter, feeling fulfilled in their ability to help others.  According to their last statistics update, Kiva alone has lent a total of $376,456,100, from 847,759 lenders to 916,381 borrowers in 499,110 loans.  The average number of loans made per Kiva Lender is 9 loans. Microfinance websites like Kiva have become a great platform to link people with a surplus of capital with those who would like to gain additional capital.

After beginning my master here at EOI, I have become increasingly critical regarding the systems in place to help eradicate poverty and promote economic growth.  It has lead me to take a closer look at organizations, like Kiva, and try to understand their  true impact in terms of poverty reduction and sustainable development.

These arguments are difficult to answer.  According to Give Well, many microfinance organizations do not perform adequate research to assess the true rate of poverty reduction, and improvement in quality of life, because of their programs.

 

So, is microfinance really helping alleviate poverty?

Should private donors, like my family, donate to websites like Kiva, Zidisha, and Global Giving?

Are these institutions and organizations truly improving the lives of their borrowers?

The answer is still up for debate.

 

(and now, I personally am unsure…)

Comments Off on DP: Microfinance and its Increasing Popularity / 26 Nov 2012 por Amy Blyth
IMSD /

DP: Human Security as a Response to Neoliberalism

As we have discussed throughout our Development Perspectives course, neoliberalism is the baseline ideology of modern capitalism and consequently, the reigning belief system of contemporary global governance. I would like to discuss the influence of post-structuralists (closely related to other characterizations such as social constructivists and post-colonialists) to the field of development studies. The post constructivist school of thought opposes the current world order as deliberately and asymmetrically constructed in favor of the “Global North”. As a result, some of the field’s foremost scholars propose what I consider to be one of the most compelling evolutions in the development debate: human security.

First, a quick word on neoliberalism: Supported by the world’s superpower nations, neoliberalism operates on the idea that businesses are better suited without state intervention (i.e. free markets); therefore bolstering the economy, which in turn is good for the people. The major flaw in such an ideology is that neoliberal states and institutions that call for “free” markets are the same structures that manipulate truly pure “freedoms” by enacting asymmetrical and self-serving policies throughout the world. Neoliberals adiaphorically defend their actions using a Hobbesian or Darwinist view of the world, saying that inequality and conflict (read: injustice) is inevitable. Neoliberalism is successful because it relies on these presumably right norms to justify a denial of structural violence and human rights in favor of First World wealth and power.

In other words, neoliberalism has been criticized for institutionalizing human insecurity. This “insecurity” can be defined by a broad a wide range of direct (oppressive) and indirect (structural) human rights violations across gender, ethnicity, class, race, sexual orientation, mobility, access to education, access to markets, and other practices that limit true freedoms (as Amartya Sen describes) for all members of the human family.

Social constructivism, on the other hand, is sympathetic to the suffering global majority and criticizes the current world order as being deliberately engineered, highly biased, and fundamentally unjust. It does so by challenging the Darwinist notion of global governance favored by neoliberalism, instead arguing that today’s world order is a result of human choices and man-made structures. Through this lens, naturist inevitability arguments are unfounded because the structures and policies that create global suffering are created and maintained by human decision. Therefore, if these power relationships are socially constructed and socially evolved, than they most certainly can (and should) be reconstructed.

The central observation of social constructivism asserts that neoliberalism sees the current world [dis]order as inevitable and that the world is fixed and immutable. Social constructivism, rather, claims that what we actually have is a system of hierarchical rivalries that control how states relate, which is organized around neoliberal market forces and competition. Social constructivism criticizes these processes as merely strengthening the hegemonic control of the global North and asks how such finite resources can be redistributed to restore human security.

Human security, therefore, has been an evolving theoretical and political extension of the constructivist community that proposes a reorganization of global governance. It shifts the referent object to the human, rather than the state, which reshapes the current state security top-down approach into a bottom-up security agenda focused on the victims of global power struggles. Human security doesn’t propose wholly replacing the state security agenda, but rather elevating international civilian problems into mainstream security.

Despite the human security approach’s compelling shift to the human referent object, many questions have yet to be answered. Debates over the ‘vital core’ of the human that merits protection, the degree to which a threat becomes an international human security concern, the right to humanitarian intervention, and the unique contribution of human security as compared to other similar fields such as human rights and human development are only a few of the contested points in the human security debate. For this post, I think that human security discourse may be best summarized by an examination of its theoretical split within the proponent community between the varying interpretations of the narrow-focused minimalists and the more broad-focused maximalists.

Minimalists are primarily concerned with making human security policy coherent, which often requires that they ignore poverty- or development-related security issues and instead prioritize political violence so that policy-makers can develop more refined and measurable action. Narrow proponents believe that by focusing on violent threats, human security can be pragmatic, conceptually clear, and can therefore be rigorously assessed and measured. The problem that narrow proponents face is a potential “discursive insurrection” in which the human security agenda could be subsumed into the very security agenda that it seeks to change.

However, broad proponents see human security in the bigger picture—recognizing that true human security would rewrite international relations in such a way that would displace the neoliberal agenda all together. These scholars maintain that broader capabilities deprivations such as poverty, disease, and environmental disasters are indispensable components of the human security approach, asserting that if the referent object is the human, than the human must be protected against all potential threats. Maximalists are often left out of policy-making because their ideas are so complex and overarching that finding practical application within the current security structure would be simply impossible (and hypocritical).

Surely these problems are complex, and no simple solution exists to address the deeply devastating suffering of the majority of the global population. Many human security proponents argue that the often-criticized broadness of the human security agenda is actually its strength. Some scholars maintain that human security is an essential approach to our equally expansive human insecurity and that human security can be viewed as the intersect of a variety of fields including relief work, human development, human rights, and conflict resolution. This synergy is a cornerstone of human security—we cannot expect simple solutions for complex problems. The integrated human security approach facilitates the analysis necessary for addressing complex human suffering. It is time that human security answers the call of the global majority that suffers under the weight of a ruthless few.

The UNDP 1994 Human Development Report (which first introduced the concept of human security) reads, “in the final analysis, human security is a child who did not die, a disease that did not spread, a job that was not cut, an ethnic tension that did not explode in violence, a dissident who was not silenced”. It is for these human lives, and for others that have been unjustifiably taken or marginalized, that human security remains a persistent voice in re-imagining a world of fair policy, reciprocal accountability, and a restored sense of our duty as members of the human family.

 

Comments Off on DP: Human Security as a Response to Neoliberalism / 26 Nov 2012 por Kelly Elizabeth Behrend
IMSD /

I Hope I Can Make You Feel Good

You may be asking yourself: who is she to think she can make me feel good? Fair enough, so let me start my blog by telling you who I am.

I have always cared a lot for people around me. My family, friends, classmates and colleagues could count on me for help, comfort, encouragement and laughter. On the other hand, I was born and raised in the most populous city in the southern hemisphere (São Paulo, Brazil) which made me indifferent (if not suspicious) towards strangers.

Being indifferent (if not suspicious) towards strangers can be a successful approach when you live among 10 million people who are frequently fighting for a space in the metro, a parking spot, a place in a line or a well-paid job. However, it can also lead to excessive competitiveness, stress and a strange feeling of isolation. I was experiencing all those symptoms when I was invited to a workshop on Quality of Life.

I was trying to remember this workshop’s tips to improve your quality of life (exercise? meditation? time management?). The fact is that the idea that got stuck in my mind was: do something good for a stranger every day. Cynic that I was, I asked to myself: where can I find a stranger every day to whom I can do something good and how it will help me to improve my quality of life?

The answer to my first question was (obviously or not): everywhere. Helping someone to cross the street, offering to give directions, holding a door open, giving up your seat in the metro or your spot in a line or just smiling, saying good morning. There are so many daily opportunities to do something good for a stranger!! You may find other ideas at http://www.peopleforgood.ca/

I put it in practice and can tell you that it really made me feel good. I am not a psychologist but I like the idea around the ‘feel-good, do good and do good, feel good’ phenomenon according to which people who feel joyful are more likely to do good for others and, conversely, when they do good for others they are more likely to feel happy. Actually the feeling grew so strong inside of me that I decided to leave my corporate and investment banking career and pursue a new path which brought me to EOI. I am excited to learn about Development that I believe relates to improving people’s lives and making them happier, so I am sure Development can make me a happier person too.

And you? How do you feel? Good?

Comments Off on I Hope I Can Make You Feel Good / 25 Nov 2012 por Andrea Mara Hanai
IMSD /

DP: Local food systems for a thriving community

Think Global, Act Local

Learning from our past

‘Āina: is the word for island or land in Hawai’i. If taken apart it literally translates to, “that which feeds”. This interpretation of land by the Hawaiian culture recognizes that the earth was not thought of as a possession, but rather as a provider of our needs. The ancient Hawaiians like many native people throughout history lived within a subsistent community, cultivating their own food and only consuming as much as was available. In Hawai’i, the system was called, the ahupua’a system.

The system split the land up into natural slivers shaped by the existing landscape, from the mountains to the ocean and allowed for those within a certain ahupua’a to trade among themselves using the different resources that their area specialized in.

Without getting into too much detail about the complex ahupua’a system or the culture of subsistence of those days, I want to step back and take a broad look at how this system contributed to a thriving community of people as sharing and trading resources among one another.

Locally Grown

My passion is to draw on specific practices of this system and reinvigorate it with the tools that we have today. To bring back the importance of local agricultural practices, fresh & balanced diets and a sense of community through edible landscaping, has been my passion not only as a farmer’s daughter, but as a steward of the land in which I grew up.

By creating healthy food systems within your own local community you do not only provide fresh produce that keeps the wealth circulating within your home, but also I have seen first hand how it inspires the spirit of a community. Studies have even suggested that planting a garden within a community has lowered crime rates.

Slowly all around the world we can see these ideas percolating among neighborhoods and communities. In my home town, I helped in a movement called,Permablitz, that brought together experts and members of a neighborhood to help one person install a garden in their home or work place for free. After the volunteers participated in at least three Permablitz events they were then able to host their own ‘garden party’ in which other people were able to come and help out. This not only broke down the barrier of trying to start a garden without the labor and expertise of others, but further encouraged learning of practices and trading of produce and goods that they then shared among each other.

I believe this is the answer to  rebuild not only a community that cares about their land, but a society that is able to provide their own food, encourage healthy eating habits, interact with one another in a positive way and minimize their impact on the importation of food.

Global Perspective

Throughout this course so far we have looked at developmental and social issues across the globe. But as we have talked about extensively in our class, there are so many approaches that we think can be the answer from the outside but within these small communities the same solutions do not work, and the best way is to come up with local solutions from within. However, if we are aware  of the impact that each of us have on the rest of the world, it is even more apparent to me that we must be able to solve our own problems first so that we do not continue to pass on the impacts of our current problems to others. What I see is the destruction and improper use of resources from those less fortunate in order to meet the needs of those that are more fortunate. The only way to break this system is to be able to see first hand the impact that a depletion of resources can have, and if we are relying on our own resources as the ancient Hawaiians did, perhaps we will be more conscious about how it should be managed.

It’s time for us to adapt the ways of our ancestors and create solutions for our local community that in the end will benefit our global community.

Below is a short video of a Permablitz project in Hawai’i. Bringing the community together to build and grow their own.

Click here to view the embedded video.

1 comentario / 25 Nov 2012 por Ivory McClintock Kealani Pan
IMSD /