Friday 16 November 2012

Corporations are at the heart of sustainability dynamism

Sustainability may still be in its infancy in absolute terms, but the move towards building ethically sound businesses has steadily gained momentum for last many years. Protecting the brand values, producing environmentally responsible products, carbon neutrality and social responsibilities are the new challenges for the board members. Many of these values have now embedded within the DNA of many business organisations. In their recent research carried out by edie.net, Sustainable Business magazine and Temple Group in the UK found that almost seven in 10 businesses (69%) consider sustainability to be a priority business driver for success in 2012, 40% of those see it as a high priority, i.e. at the core of their business strategy.
The rapid increases in sustainability into corporate culture obviously tell something. First of all, corporation’s survival at stake if they do not imbed these above mentioned values within their overall mission and vision. Secondly, it is logical to do so while businesses are facing increased environmental challenges, trying to achieve things that can make a difference to their businesses environmental performances as well as productivity, efficiency and profits. Very simple examples can be given from a world leading manufacturer of copiers and office automations. This company has recently developed a programme called ‘sustainability optimisation programme’ - an immediate and measurable results in five steps e.g. analyse, design, implement, govern & neutralise, in which customers are able to become carbon neutral across their document management services.
The manufacturer in this case has not stopped just to sale the machine hardware (used to be in old days); instead it developed an innovative way to reduce customer’s (In-Use phase) negative environmental impacts. Benefits have been immense for both the manufacturer and customers.  Manufacturer has received more new orders, re-boosted their completive advantage, increased green image, inter alia winning the top prize in “the EFQM Sustainability Good Practice Competition” in 2011. On the customer side, benefits have not been unnoticed. Customers managed to save costs by saving hard copy papers, energy and waste; in particular, they have also raised their green credentials - a win-win situation for all the parties involved.
For the same manufacturer, similar situation exist in the other aspects of development of new copiers and printers for example, technological innovation in energy savings (i.e. quick start-up technology that shorten warm-up time, ultra-thin shell-fusing roller that achieves quick warm up of fusing roller, two separately controlled heaters that achieve equal warm up of fusing roller, tin-free low temperature fixing eco toner etc.), bio-mass toner, bio-mass plastic parts, automatic green reporting (i.e. an analysis of customer’s ‘as-is’ energy usage and carbon emissions from the products and paper used). This kind of smart and small changes always help to create value. All these cutting edge technological innovations reflect company’s willingness to grow, staying ahead of the competition, while doing so, the company has also considered environmental impacts from their products, de facto help them moving towards a more sustainable (in economic terms) and environmentally benign future.
One of the biggest changes that has happened over the past two decades within the larger manufactures that is a holistic approach in thinking and planning all the way from digging the raw-materials from the earth to manufacture the products, distribution, selling and disposing the waste. Every step of the process touches the very core of three pillars of sustainability - economic, social and environmental aspects. Similar changes have happened also within the service sector organisations. They are very keenly following their economic, social and environmental performances of doing their business. They are also part of overall sustainability package.
The strategies to achieve sustainable business outcome is to secure first the brand integrity, transparency and authenticity. It would be easier and cost-effective for those businesses that have already received considerable attention for many years as an ethical business that has environmental good practices and social obligations within their overall corporate strategy. I am not suggesting that the new sustainability practitioners will have hard time – not quiet, they will immediately be picked up by the customers, then the business organisation can further strengthen their brand reputation by engaging more on social and environmental obligations and the effect could be even stronger.
I touched upon technological innovations in the above discussion. Businesses need to drive the green technological innovations (i.e. sustainability through green innovation), which would touch the fundamentals of sustainable business practices with the aim of reduced waste, innovative manufacturing processes that would require less water and energy, minimising greenhouse gas emissions, using more recycled and alternative materials to manufacture the same products. Also, it is important to encourage the entire supply chain as well as their customers to drive the green technological innovation to achieve similar benefits. By doing this, it is possible to bring everyone on-board within the sustainability obligations.
Sustainability does not mean that it is all about minimising CO2 emissions. It is in fact a tiny part of the whole sustainability dynamism. As our society is facing increasingly negative impacts of global warming from the green house effects, therefore minimising the CO2 has now become a usual norm. Sustainability dynamism is obviously much bigger than this. It’s not only saving water, energy, wise and careful use of resources or eating organic foods, but also, social policies related to the employees and the communities (particularly where the business organisations operate) are equally important as driving the green technological innovation or any other aspects of business growth.
Social policies such as equal opportunity and diversity, appropriate laws against discrimination, action against forced labour, health and safety, work-life balance, right pension scheme, freedom of association and collective bargaining, possibilities of internal promotion for the employees are also very important. Likewise, policies related to the communities such as human rights, job opportunity, children and adult education, infrastructure development, health safety and environmental protection and biodiversity conservation etc. are immensely important in achieving sustainability goals. They are two sides of the same coin and part and parcel of the value creating corporate social responsibility where business contributes to the social concerns and at the same time contribute to their business growth.
Larger business organisations are perhaps one of the biggest sectors in our society, employing millions of people and many cases operating almost every country in the world. It is possible to achieve near sustainability point if every business organisation and their employees do their part. A collective approach within the business sector could bring our society closer to a sustainable future that we all wish for.      

Wednesday 10 October 2012

Building resilience to the climate change in Bangladesh

Bangladesh as a nation stands at ground zero in the face of climate change crunch. It is well supported with evidence that the unique geographical location with complex physical environment has put Bangladesh at the epicentre of one of the greatest threats that mankind has ever faced. Sited in the Bengal delta, it’s one of the most fertile regions on earth, but not prone to the natural calamities. Population in the area have been living under the natural calamities for generations; hence they have naturally developed strong individual and community resilience in a dynamic way. While the impacts of climate change are intensifying – increasingly people will have to build extra resilient communities to prepare for the worst.

I start to wonder if I am being too pessimistic and sounding more like the doomsday is approaching. May be it is too harsh but surely Bangladesh has got an impending crisis in its hand and bearing the biggest burnt of the impacts of climate change. From inundating low-lying coastal areas to stronger cyclones, increased coastal erosion and flooding, intrusion of saline water, changing patterns in crops and vegetation, risk of spread of infectious diseases and environmental refugee are among few noticeable problems. No doubt, it is a matter of great concern and The Government of Bangladesh (GoB) has taken it very seriously. In 2005, the Government of Bangladesh developed the National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) after extensive consultations with the public and private sectors, with different communities and other members of civil society. Subsequently Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (BCCSAP) were also adopted in September 2008 with the aim to tackle climate change impacts for next 10 (2009 – 2018) years, also capacity building for next 20 - 25 years.

It says - ‘it’s better late than never’. Even if it is late but at best the mitigation and adaptation process and the overall national efforts to build resilience has started. Long before the unforeseen consequences of climate change, Bangladeshi people had to adapt themselves with the heavy rainfalls, floods, droughts, cyclones for generations. People built their houses on the mounds and raised the rural roads and paths where there have been risks of flooding. Farmers watched very carefully seasonal patterns before planting their crops, planting more water tolerant and high-yield crops (e.g. different varieties of rice, alternative cereals) as the knowledge and availability of seeds grew over the years, moving to temporary storm shelters, and also moving their domestic animals to safer places. Most of the cases no one had to teach them – life experiences have been their best teacher.

Among others, one of the biggest challenges that GoB has to tackle is the climate refugee issues. Comprehensive surveys carried out in 2010 by over 200 community-based organisations and coordinated by the remarkable efforts of the Association of Climate Refugees found that a staggering 6.5 million citizens (1.3 million households) of Bangladesh have already been displaced by the effects of climate change (Leckie et al, 2011). The need for solution for climate displacement people and improvement of data collection of migration from the affected areas are absolutely paramount.

However, there are no clear indications how population displacement problems will be addressed in the policies (Akter, 2009). In addition, there are no detailed action plans with a timeframe to tackle this problem. By and large, GoB has provided support and rehabilitation programmes when it is needed on the ground after the event of any natural disaster but this support has been somewhat peace-meal and sporadic basis. Negligence, corruption and favour people who support the same political party in power over others by the local disaster management authority should be avoided primarily for the greater benefit of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged people.

Affected local communities should be recognised as the most important party to get involved in the community based adaptation process. First question needed to be asked – what the community wants and then choosing the right issues & methods to combat the impacts. Local community should be motivated to be involved and the authority (e.g. local government) should value their involvement, besides the authority need to be clear about how the community will be benefitted from participating in such initiatives. Using their local understandings and making sure that the right priority to the right community in adaptation measures is being deployed. Furthermore, non-biased participation is very much needed and not only government experts or the bureaucrats but also experts from wider public sector should be involved in the public participation process.

Last but not least, everything is meaningless if actions are not behind the words. Repeatedly, it’s been pointed out that having plethora of national policies to tackle climate change wouldn't help if they are not respected and implemented appropriately. Making people aware of climate change impacts by balance and accurate reporting on the newspapers, local and national radios and TVs, also communicating the causes of global warming and climate change, what government is doing about it and sharing community best practices in adaptation processes are absolutely crucial.
  

Thursday 6 September 2012

Sustainability is a utopian dream and magnanimous entity

In everyday life we hear about the words 'sustainable' and 'sustainability' almost in everything. These words are commonly used as sustainable livelihoods, sustainable transport, sustainable energy, sustainable agriculture, sustainable economy, sustainable society, biological sustainability and various types of sustainability indexes and the list can go on. We have seen this growing trend since late 80’s when the United Nation’s Bruntland Report; also known as ‘Our Common Future’ was published with a key statement on ‘Sustainable Development’ as ‘development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.’ Since then, the society has been in the midst of continual transformation towards a sustainable future that is expected to preserve wellbeing of the present and future generations to thrive on a habitable planet.

To me ‘Sustainability’ is an enormous word encapsulates almost everything that is practically happening around us. It’s the human capacity to endure in economic, environmental and social aspects – a widely accepted vision, which is probably here to stay with us for very long time. While tightly-knotted with the three pillars (e.g. economic, environmental & social aspects), sustainability can be difficult to be understood, even more difficult to foresee whether absolute, complete or even near sustainability is somehow achievable.

Undoubtedly, sustainability is good and it’s the very best thing on our plate at this moment in time. It took long time for our society to understand that human development and progress goes hand in hand with the health and wellbeing of our planet. If you turn the clock back for only 50 years then you will find that no one actually talked about carrying capacity of natural systems, green development, ecological modernisation or even responsible planning and management of resources. Now the world must consider these underpinning ideas for its own survival.

However, Putting sustainability perspective into practice is increasingly harder when the ‘sustainability divide’ between rich and poor countries are so large; given the fact that it’s almost dream comes true for those poorest countries to reach at least a near sustainability point. One person’s sustainability measure in richer countries can be other person’s (extreme) luxury in the poorer countries. In many fronts, ‘sustainability divide’ between rich and poor countries are very uneven and once we start talking about the divide, it would definitely touch the very core of many burning issues in recent time namely population growth, poverty, food & fresh water scarcity, global inequality of consumption, economic insecurity, environmental pollution and climate change etc.

Some claim with justification that pursuing a social-economic-environmental (triple bottom line) relationship is easy to be implemented. But I think it’s not as easy as it seems. A few very simple examples can be mentioned here (there are of course many more) to illustrate the complex relationship in bridging the great divide between rich and poor countries, such as using energy efficiency devices in homes, waste recycling, deterioration of public health due to increased level of pollution, discrimination in respect of employment and occupation and economic insecurity of low income families etc. These are multidisciplinary areas yet interconnected challenges within sustainability aspirations. All these challenges can be pinned down one big umbrella of ‘poverty elimination’ issues, which fits within the sustainable livelihoods approach.

In the poorer countries, in general, using energy efficiency devices in homes is a luxury. In fact millions of families in those countries do not have any devices at all because they cannot afford it. And, those people who have the devices don’t know how they are going to dispose it at the end of the product life-cycle as there are no organised waste management and recycling centres. As a result, these used products will end up in wrong hands; thus increases the risk of air, water and soil contamination. This is a very simple example illustrates that lack of appropriate and well-maintained waste management and recycling centres, the aspirations (of a very tiny portion) of sustainability issues cannot be fulfilled.

Another classic example is environmental degradation in urban areas. The root causes of environmental degradation in urban areas are the unplanned and hardly coordinated inter-play of socio-economic, institutional and technical activities. The rapid and unplanned expansion of the cities has resulted in the degradation of urban environment and the city dwellers are the victims who are taking its toll on their health. Coping with these impacts depend on a society's technical, institutional, economic, and social ability. Near sustainability may be possible when a country has got these abilities to cope with the impacts, however reaching to that point for many countries around the world is still a very long way to go.

Numerous examples can be drawn to show the disparities but fact of the matter is near sustainability cannot be achieved if we do not tackle poverty, and those interrelated elements that inflict and increase the poverty rates. We must appreciate that society have found sustainability silver bullet - at least having a perspective and focusing to preserve the wellbeing for the present and future generations but let’s not be lulled into utopian dream that sustainability will be achieved very soon. It’s a process that I think will take very long time – it’s not time yet to think about beyond sustainability issues as society is still in a premature stage in responding the present global sustainability promises.  

Thursday 16 August 2012

Grammen bank, micro-entrepreneurs & green economy: Bangladesh perspective

Professor Muhammad Yunus’s Grammen Bank has come a long way since its origin in 1976. Admittedly, it wasn’t an easy journey; not least his recent brawl with the Government of Bangladesh when he was ordered to step down as head of the micro-finance bank. However, in 2006, the World has recognised his contribution in poverty reduction and subsequently he was awarded Nobel peace prize. It made him world famous - all gratitude on behalf of people of Bangladesh go to him as he made all Bangladeshis very proud indeed.
His concept on micro-finance is very simple. Rural poor people (with a particularly emphasis on women) can take small loans to start any business, which they are usually good at doing. Once revenue start to come in, they can start returning the money that was borrowed and with the help of revolving loan funds their businesses can further grow, thus leaving behind poverty and destitution. A fantastic idea that was revolutionised entire banking system in mid 1970s.
On the other hand, economic impact assessment of micro financing has been debated in the literature for many years. Particularly in Bangladesh many researchers do not agree with the conclusion that micro-credit definitely increase poor people’s income and consumption hence reducing the poverty level. Critiques have been arguing that micro financing is slow, high interest rates, over-indebtedness, commercialisation, lack of women’s authority in a male dominated society, religious tradition (e.g. sharia tradition), cultural stigma (e.g. women dependency is repulsive) and natural calamity (that wipes of loan holder’s assets) have put added obstacles in economic empowering of women.
The debate goes on - if micro-financing is helping poor people to reduce their poverty level then why after so many years millions of people are still poor in the rural Bangladesh. If the same concept is working appropriately in other countries around the world then where has it gone wrong in Bangladesh? It isn’t a logical fallacy but a valid question. Counter argument is that there are too many people to lift them out of poverty and many variables and factors associated within the context of Bangladesh; moreover, in a slow process like micro-financing, it would take decades to see the real impact. Indeed, it has been very debateable, yet over the last three decades millions of poor people were benefited with the help of micro-financing in Bangladesh.
Critics, more specifically the proponents of communist ideas have gone further - saying that the entire flagship Grammen Bank micro-credit movement is another way to counter the spread of communism. Providing small and hand-to-mouth loans to the poorest would thaw the undercurrent in building any future revolution, which could potentially jeopardise the capitalist system. And counter the spread of communism would be highly desirable by the capitalist masters. That, in my opinion, may or may not be verifiable as there is no hard evidence to prove that the expansion of global empire had reached to the poorest in rural Bangladesh by introducing micro-financing system in mid 1970s.
Say, if the communist revolution were to happen, then perhaps there would be an arms struggle and the conflict might drag for many years. We don’t have to go too far – our neighbouring country India is a perfect example, the Maoist revolutionaries have been fighting for decades against poverty and extreme inequality in parts of Central and Eastern India, including Chhattisgarh, Orissa and Jharkhand. The Indian government repeatedly launched full-scale war against these rebels and the consequences have been more deaths and destruction.
After the recent economic turmoil around the World, the communism-capitalism cat-and-mouse arguments have metaphorically become ailing lame-duck. Banking crisis around the World is costing taxpayers’ vast amount of money; whilst banks are still reluctant to provide loans to the small businesses, which in turn would reactivate the economy. Irresponsible free market capitalism that led us into this situation and the world need to get out of this recession unless bank will provide more micro finances to the small and medium sized businesses. Therefore, there is a need for this mechanism to be applied to the wider scale around the world.
On the other hand communist system driven by a centralised economic planning has not worked either and that is why economic reforms (e.g. de-collectivisation of agriculture sector, promote private entrepreneurs and foreign direct investments etc.) were taking place since 1980s in most of the major communist countries. But that does not mean that the revolution should not be happening, also its capability should not be underestimated. Given that it can happen in different ways. Revolution needs to happen to build a new green economy that would result in poverty reduction, increased equality and human wellbeing while reducing environmental negative impacts and at the same time increasing natural capital.
We ought to build a low carbon and resource efficiency society. Keep that in mind, Grameen Bank can make a real difference largely to rural Bangladeshis by introducing more and more micro-credits for renewable energy, pollution prevention, and water purification and desalination technologies.

Tuesday 24 July 2012

'Green, Green - Up, Up!’ Shouting louder than ever!

Since my childhood I have always been fascinated by the nature and its beauty and tranquillity. One of my favourite memories from childhood at Jhenidah Cadet College (JCC) campus is discovering the stunning natural surroundings. Also, be drawn to the allure of the rare sense of serenity where I could often get away from the reality. I still marvel over how I spent countless hours wandering through the bushes, fearlessly running around barefoot on the ground infested with weeds, shrubs and prickly plants, and recklessly jumped into the canal water without thinking of the consequences. It’s hard to forget - I still cherish those wonderful days. It was then I began to realise that green colour was my colour - it’s the colour of the 'Nature'.

The most remarkable thing happened afterwards. After preparing for months for the admission tests that appeared to be the most intense period of my life, I got myself admitted to JCC, and guess what; it was Badr House where I spent six years of my teenage life. Green colour symbolises the colour of Badr House. Being a campus boy, I used to wander around and frequently say ‘hello’ to the cadets and curiously followed their activities. I heard many rumours about Badr house that it was one the toughest places but to be placed in the green house was probably my destiny.

Once again, green colour was embedded in my life for next six years. We shouted and chanted 'Green, Green - Up, Up!' whenever we won any competition. In many cases, we needlessly recited the slogan but I never realised that later in my life this slogan would become the part of my entire professional career. Now, I shout louder than ever - 'Green, Green – Up, Up!’ In light of these, the basic teaching of the 'Green' theme is that we all should keep the nature at the top of our agenda – ‘save the nature, save the humanity’.







Wednesday 27 June 2012

Are we falling out of love with wind turbines?

Rising concerns over global warming and climate change, energy security, on-going tension in the middle-east, gradual depletion of fossil fuels while the global demand steadily increases, also in hindsight society’s increased green consciousness led to search for alternative sources of cleaner energy. It is easy to see why the interests have shifted to viable and all available forms of renewable energy. The world has started acknowledging that getting energy from wind is a viable, cost effective and reliable option with the help of the advancement of renewable energy technologies. We are now experiencing an obvious reflection of that in the world market for wind turbines, which set a new record in the year 2011 and reached a total size of 42 Giga watt, after 37,6 Giga watt in 2010 (World Wind Energy Association, 7 February 2012). Steve Sawyer; General Secretary at Global Wind Energy Council in 2011 stated that ‘The success of wind power over the past 15 years is truly extraordinary. With nearly 240,000 MW of installed capacity at the end of 2011, this is more than 30 times what it was in 1997, when the Kyoto Protocol was adopted.’

On the other hand, growing public discontent with the wind turbines commonly described as 'Not in My Backyard' syndrome has also grown along with the use of wind turbines. Many people may want off-shore wind turbines, but not necessarily they will want wind turbines in their own backyards. It is perfectly understandable and decision makers, developers and pro-green groups should acknowledge it and take all necessary steps to avoid local public opposition and uneasiness.

However, in saying this, public participation process in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is the key and first step in an application process where interested and affected parties are brought together to discuss the possible negative impacts and benefits and if necessary alternative projects are considered on proposed controversial sites. Therefore, the notion of imposed large scale commercial wind turbine sites by the developers particularly in the built areas would simply be an immature argument. Usually large scale wind turbines wouldn’t be considered in the first place in the built areas where it is obvious that tall buildings and big trees can prevent natural wind flow that in turn would reduce the efficiency of the wind turbines. The gaps or passes of the mountains, coastal areas, hill tops and often open plains are the most preferred places for installation of wind turbines.

Wind turbines vary in different sizes according to the amount of electricity they produce, for example 100 watts to 6 kilowatts. Even larger wind turbines are available which can produce up to 50 kilowatts of electricity for the bigger community projects. Technologically it is therefore viable and available according to needs of different sites such as private housings, schools, shopping centres, car parks, business areas, community centres etc.

However, up until now, there have been many common myths around wind turbines and public perceptions that have naturally followed and concentrated where the controversial proposed sites made the bad news coverage. But, are wind turbines really bad for the birds? Are they noisy, unsafe, decrease the property values, loss of agriculture lands, also an eyesore for many that destroy scenic views of the pristine nature? However, most of these common myths are based mostly on misunderstandings and old wind energy technologies.

New technologies and tighter environmental regulations have changed many things over the past decade. A typical annoyance such as noise emission is not a problem anymore as the noise from the gearboxes and generators are significantly curbed by using insulations. So, left with only aerodynamics noise from the rotor blades, which have also been optimised using modern technology such as using pitch control and minimising rotational speed under 65 m/s at the tip (Barrios and Rodriguez, 2004).

It’s true that many birds died in California and Spain in the 1980s due to poor planning and technologies that were used at that time but the mass killing is simply not happening at present due to better understanding of bird’s behaviour, knowing flight patterns of migratory birds and vigorous EIA processes. According to a new study conducted by British researchers from the environmental group The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), Scottish Natural Heritage and British Trust for Ornithology (BTO), there is no evidence of long-term damage to bird populations as a result of wind turbine operations (Schrader, 2012).

May be wind turbine is an eyesore and annoyance for some people but it’s a tiny problem compared to its positive contribution to the greater good of our planet and the society. The benefits from the wind turbines definitely outweigh the disadvantages. I think wind turbines are viable and an effective option - let’s not fall out of love with it just because some people are uncomfortable.

Wednesday 11 April 2012

Climate Change: A case for Bangladesh-India solidarity

It’s no fairy-tale, but a harsh reality that climate change is a growing threat to both India and Bangladesh, above all to the whole Southern Eurasia. Maintaining the status quo of living together-apart and longstanding antagonism between these two countries will certainly not help to tackle a common threat, which outweighs the other disparities that may exist.

Like Bangladesh, India is also affected by the impacts of climate change. Impacts are already being felt by unprecedented heat waves, cyclones, floods, salinisation of the coastline and effects on agriculture, fisheries and health (Mehra, 2009)  Destruction of India’s climate-sensitive sectors such as agriculture, forestry and fisheries will inevitably put a knock-on affect on its global ambition of economic growth and huge development imperatives.

Being the largest country in the South East Asia and living with the impacts of climate change; India seems to acknowledge that the sub-continental challenges caused by climate change will most likely to be cross-border migration and the water scarcity. Nonetheless, it is still unclear how India will cope with the regional challenges generated by climate change beyond 2030 (Indian National Intelligence Council, 2009).

It says power and responsibilities go hand in hand, being an economic power house in the South East Asia India’s behaviour towards its neighbours particularly Bangladesh suggests otherwise. India’s piece-meal diplomacy, ongoing geo-political disputes, lack of economic dynamism within the region, ignorant behaviour and lack of effective regional institutions to adapt and mitigate the climate change impacts are making things more difficult in cross-border engagement and cooperation. As a result, both countries are fighting alone in the face of looming threat of climate change.

One of the most pressing issues in the region is the fresh water related challenges in the river basins, which will definitely dominate the socio-economic and political arena for many years to come. In 2009, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) assessed three trans-boundary river basins which included the largest in South Asia: the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna (GBM) river basin (which spans Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India and Nepal), the Indus river basin (in Afghanistan, China, India, Nepal and Pakistan) and the Helmand river basin (which covers Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan). In their report, it was highlighted that over-exploitation, climate change and inadequate cooperation among countries threaten some of the world's greatest river basins, which sustain around 750 million people.

It is absolutely paramount that there is a need for fresh approach in cohesion and solidarity among bigger and smaller nations in combating climate change and water scarcity in the region. Particularly with Bangladesh [the ground zero of climate change], India shares so many common ecological and environmental issues, for example mangrove forests of Sundarban, hill forests, trans-boundary river basins, tidal flooding, cross-border pollution, land and maritime boundaries, and cross-border natural resources. These are complex and inter-related issues; therefore India cannot ignore the fact that the negative impacts on these issues wouldn’t create any problems for them. If you ask Indian side, most likely the answer will be clear unequivocal ‘yes’, it is affecting them as much as much as it is affecting on Bangladeshi side.

‘India’s look east ties’ (Ved, 2010) policy towards Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) is great for them to achieve their dream of economic growth and prosperity but the question is - what India is willing to do within their own backyards? It is shocking that India's trade is just 5% with its neighbours (Economist, 30th July, 2011), which manifest that the economic super power in the South East Asia is not keen to facilitates intra-regional trade, thereafter establishes a vibrant and prosperous mutual economic region that may then empower smaller countries further developing on their strategic adaptation and implementation to the effects of climate change.

Strengthening existing agreements are easier than creating new one, therefore I think the possible way forward in closer cooperation is to promote and strengthen of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Environment Plan.  16th SAARC summit (28 - 29 April 2010) in Thimphu; Bhutan was one of the important milestones towards promoting and strengthening regional cooperation where member states welcomed the signing of the SAARC Convention on Cooperation on Environment. 16 statements on climate change were adapted in Thimphu and member states agreed that those declarations should be undertaken. Time and again deep concern was expressed in various SAARC summits over the global climate change and its impact on the region, however in retrospect, things had move forward at a snail's phase with regard to regional cooperation.

Nevertheless, most recent visit by the Prime Minister of the Republic of India, Dr. Manmohan Singh to Bangladesh from 6-7 September 2011 demonstrates India’s willingness to engage to find newer avenues for cooperation. India and Bangladesh need more this kind of joint initiatives to improve first of all bilateral relationship, also being in the forefront of further development of the SAARC Environment Plan - a very common and important cause that none of the countries can afford to ignore.

India respects China's growing power and influence, which regard as a threat to its own interest in the region. India will inevitably fall behind China if it doesn't response to the call for regional cooperation; therefore India has got more chance of winning than losing if they become a true and trustworthy partner with its neighbours.

Wednesday 29 February 2012

Climate change sceptics got a taste of their own medicine

I have always had my suspicion about climate change sceptics’ real intentions of undermining the climate change science. Now, the hard evidences have come forward, in which point to the fact that my curiosity and suspicion were not just a baseless assumption. I wrote about it in my earlier blog 'Climate Change myths: Common misperceptions and sceptic’s incorrect assertions’, which was posted on 21st January, 2011.

On the Valentine's day 2012, Heartland Institute - a US based conservative and libertarian public policy think-tank came under the spotlight  when a dump of leaked documents were posted online by the climate news website DeSmogBlog. It was a staggering revelation of previously unknown facts. Heartland Institute has been so far at the forefront of efforts to discredit climate change science and now the revelations about its efforts have been proven to be true. Most shocking thing was that a document called ‘2012 Fundraising Plan’ in where was described strategies how to insert doubt on teaching of climate change science particularly to the elementary and secondary school curricula, some documents also confirm on future projects such as a $100,000 campaign to discourage teachers from teaching science.

This is not the end of the stories. Heartland Institute has also received donations from many big corporations which have publicly supported climate change actions. But shamefully these corporations have supported sceptics behind the scenes to push forward corporate agenda to undermine the basics of climate change science. Along with tobacco giants Altria and Reynolds America, and drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilley, major corporations have given over $1.1m in the past two years to the institute, and are planning to give another $705,000 this year (The Guardian, Thursday 16 February 2012). To me it’s the hypocrisy and double standards at its’ highest level.

I have written numerous times about the importance of social responsibility, social sustainability and the ethical business practices. Business organisations can no longer ignore their social and environmental obligations. Ignoring these values will put any big business organisations vulnerable to competitive threats. Leadership and commitment across the company to reduce negative environmental impacts cannot be based on some shaky beliefs and contradictions. Big corporations who are at the centre of this storm have allowed themselves funding a climate change sceptic institution; in response they probably have destroyed consumers' trust and corporate image which may take years to rebuild. They have shot themselves in the feet.

Many observers may suggest that it’s all now equalised with the revelations about the hacked emails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in the UK in 2010. In which there were evidences of preventing scientific data from being released, also Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007 report was mistakenly claimed that all Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2030. Climate change denials got the perfect ammunition to [re]load their guns then. But, now we cannot perceive this analogy as tit-for-tat or the pressure and the burden have been equalised, therefore business should be as usual.

It’s far from it. These revelations from both sides of the camps have fundamentally changed the way proponents and the opponents of climate change will work in the future. Sceptics have particularly a big job on their hands to convince people in arguing with credible science that would prove that climate change is not happening. Otherwise, we don’t have to wait too long to see climate sceptics are getting the taste of their own medicine again.           


Monday 20 February 2012

Damn it! Building Tipaimukh dam is not the way forward

Public pressure and disagreement on both sides of Bangladeshi and Indian borders are growing against India’s decision to build highly controversial Tipaimukh dam on the River Barak in Manipur district. Amid mounting international protests, India is still embroiled with its egoistic plan to go ahead with the venture. Burying head in the sand attitude by India is not something new. Wounds are still fresh from the Farakka Barrage fiasco since its construction began in 1961 and later was operational in 1975. As if Farakka Barrage wasn’t enough now we have the Tipaimukh dam. The pain keeps getting worst when another dam controversy goes on, Karl Marx once famously quoted ‘History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce’. Well, it looks like its happening again. However, questions arise why India is so stubborn to build another huge dam, which will undoubtedly affect downstream riparian Bangladesh.

Dig a little deeper then you will get the answers. The present socio-economic and political circumstances in the North-Eastern part [particularly Assam, Manipur & Nagaland] of India are affected by the rebellion of [so called] left-wing activists with over five decades of long history of insurgency. So far central government in Delhi couldn't manage to get a grip on the rise in rebellion by force. Offering 10% free electricity to local people from the Tipaimukh dam project is a dirty trick to calm the situation and along the line it is possible that Bangladesh is on the line of fire in Indian internal political manoeuvring. Maybe it is an over-simplistic view of the current situation. Whatever the real reasons are, it doesn’t make any sense to me why India is so desperate to build a dam, by knowing that the area is one of the most dangerous places on earth for earthquakes and landslides. Honestly, have the decision makers in Delhi gone crazy?

By ignoring all agreements and international laws and conventions on the customary international law of Trans-boundary Rivers and Lakes, India is up for its regional hegemony and dominance in the South Asia, a reckless and irresponsible behaviour only to be confronted if Bangladeshi government wishes to wage an international legal war. India is violating her international obligation under the expressed provisions of the 1996 thirty-year Ganges Water Sharing Treaty signed by the heads of state of Bangladesh and India valid until 2026. India is under an international obligation to respect the provisions of this Treaty in the light of the 1969 Vienna Convention on The Law of Treaties, as it was signed by the heads of state of Bangladesh and India (Khan, 2012).

I wonder why the Central Government in Delhi is not looking into an alternative way to produce electricity in the area. Investment in the renewable energy technologies in India is growing faster than anywhere in the world. India will exceed its Five Year Plan (2007-2012) target, installing 14.2 gigawatts (GW) of renewable compared to its target of 12.4 GW, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. The Manipur district has renewable resources in abundance - wind, sunlight and hilly landscapes are a perfect match to harness renewable energy.

However, having said that, the Manipur Renewable Energy Development Agency (MANIREDA) is at the forefront in the promotion of renewable energy technologies the Manipur district. MANIREDA is dedicated to achieve their targets to install many renewable energy technologies, for example providing 10,000 solar water heaters under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Energy Mission, setting up 200 KW solar power plant at Moreh, 165-gram panchayats were electrified and 5736 solar street lighting sets with a capacity of 444 Kilowatts were distributed (Green Technology News, 21 June, 2011), MANIREDA also aims to set up lights, cells, biogas plants and windmills in the region in pursuit of this goal. The heaters that have a capacity of 100 litre per day, cost around 25,000 each, 75 per cent of which will be provided by central and state subsidy (Panchabhutha, 15 July, 2011).

Renewable energy technologies are rapidly spreading all over the subcontinent. However, the idea of building a dam to produce electricity no longer fits ‘going green to save green’ in the 21st century's green movement and environmental consciousness; considering its adverse ecological impacts and the impacts on human health and their livelihoods. In the past, lack of appropriate Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) processes, immature international laws and agreements on trans-boundary water sharing and regional hegemony and dominance of powerful countries were the main reasons why many countries around the world got off the hook as no one was there to oppose them.

The alternative clean technologies are now available to produce electricity and where ever possible country like India should seriously consider endorsing an alternative route. India should be looking into larger scale deployment of renewable technologies to fill the electricity gap in the area. Building the hydroelectric Tipaimukh dam is definitely not the way forward.




Saturday 21 January 2012

Bangladesh needs to sow more seeds with renewable energy technologies while the ground of nuclear energy is yet to be implanted

Bangladesh is not alone in finding difficulties to fulfil its domestic energy demand; many countries around the world are facing similar problems. It’s an enormous and daunting task to find the new sources of energy in the face of ever increasing energy demand and price hike. Bangladesh is very vulnerable to many natural disasters and the impacts of climate change due to its unique geographical position, but as a whole, the country is very fortunate to have year-round sunlight, which is in no doubt a matter for jealousy of those who live in the Northern Hemisphere.  Not only year-round sunlight in Bangladesh but also strong wind which blows in the South of the country. In the summer Bangladesh has strong south-westerly wind and sea-breeze and in the winter gentle north-easterly wind and land-breeze blow through one of the longest coastal lines in the world.

The demand for power will rise to 20,000 MW by 2020 in Bangladesh (Barua, 2009). In the face of such massive energy demand, Bangladesh has got enormous potential to harness the solar and wind power to produce electricity. Energy that come from natural resources such as sunlight, wind, geothermal heat, rain, tidal waves are called renewable energy and they are naturally replenished, therefore considered as green or clean energy sources.

Over the past 20 years, installations of wind turbines and solar panels have grown faster than any other energy technologies around the world. Countries, for example Germany, Denmark, Iceland and the Maldives have set the targets to fulfil their 100% energy demand from renewable sources by 2050. Brazil has set their target to achieve 75% of electricity by 2030, China 15% by 2020 and India 20GW solar by 2022. Over 85 countries had a policy target by 2009, up from 45 countries just four years before (Teske and Chisholm, Greenpeace, 26 August, 2011).

Bangladesh also has a target to fulfil its 10% energy demand from renewable energy technologies by 2020. It is possible if good initiatives and right policies are in place, however bear in mind that having the right policies and initiatives are not often good enough in Bangladeshi context, its simply because at the operational level it loses the sight of its original purpose due to the politics and behaviour of bureaucratic organisations , corruption, negligence and bribery.

Nevertheless, the Renewable energy revolution has already started in Bangladesh. To date, there are more than 500,000 installed stand-alone Photovoltaic (PV) systems, generating over 25 megawatts of power (Kamal, New Age, 22 October, 2011). In this journey, government and non-governmental organisations such as Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB), Local Government Engineering Department (LGED), Rural Electrification Board (REB), Infrastructure Development Company Limited (IDCOL), Gameen Shakti, and Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee (BRAC) are few examples who have been contributing towards renewable energy technologies - making this a reality in Bangladesh to achieve the overall goal towards a sustainable future in energy supply.

Government has also removed all VAT and taxes from solar panels. Bangladesh Bank has created a special fund of 200 crore Taka to facilitate renewable energy technologies. Bangladesh recently signed a $300 million loan agreement with the Asian Development Bank and this loan will be used mainly to install new generators in Bangladesh's aging power plants, while new facilities will be built for renewable energy (AP News, 4 January, 2012). Also, IDCOL plans to install 10 lakh solar home systems by 2012 (Kamal, New Age, 22 October, 2011).

Indeed, things are looking very promising. But, with these big opportunities there are also many problems. High upfront cost is still too much for people to bear. Let alone financial costs for the general people to obtain solar panels or the wind turbines - what about tackling the waste issues? PV or solar panels usually have their lifespan about 30 yrs, which means there will be an end-of-life situation in the foreseeable future for presently installed solar panels. Disposing the older green technologies in a profitable and environmental friendly manner will be a big challenge for Bangladesh. Manufacturing, distribution, installation, recycling and disposing green energy technologies have potentials to create green jobs from where local economy could hugely be benefited but it is still a long way to go. At the same time, a proper, well organised and effective waste management and recycling system in Bangladesh is still shaky and remotely achievable in many years to come.

Bangladesh has a big plan for its energy future. In 2011, an agreement was signed with Russia for setting up a nuclear power plant which will cost up to US$1.0 billion. Normally, it needs eight to nine years to set up a 600-1000 megawatt (MW) power plant. The country plans to set up at least a 1000MW nuclear power plant within a decade (Khan, 2009). It is feasible to build a nuclear power plant with the help of a supper power of the world, yet an unsafe response per se, considering issues related to cost, disposal of radioactive waste, country’s health and safety records and above all adverse climatic conditions. If Bangladesh goes nuclear then one of my concerns is that the advancement of renewable energy technology will eventually slow down or even in worst case it will come to an end.

Besides nuclear ambition, I believe that there need to be parallel policy measures for further development and deployment of renewable energy technologies in every corner of Bangladesh. Once Bangladesh starts this nuclear journey, it will be practically impossible to transform back and we can now see how developed nations are struggling to set up their own green energy infrastructures as for many years they have been dependent on nuclear energy.

Energy-starved Bangladesh needs renewable energy technology, even if it fulfils the tiny percentage of energy shortfall – at least for now but over time it needs to get mature, therefore let the renewable energy revolution grow much further.