issue 6 of 2015

July-August 2015, Volum

e 6, Issue 4Solutions

ww

w.thesolutionsjournal.com

Turn the tide on Fossil Fuels!

SUSTAINABLE

VOTE

ENERGY

www.thesolutionsjournal.comUSD $5.99 CAD $6.99 EURO €4.99

Monjuree Yousuf / Green Patriot PostersPolitics, as well as social and cultural movements, have an integral role in the fight against climate change. Make your vote count by knowing politicians’ platforms on environmental policies. Politicians in tune to pressing environmental issues will promote policies that limit fossil fuels and invest in sustainable renewable energies.

July-August 2015, Volume 6, Issue 4

For a sustainable and desirable future

Solutions

Integrating Ecology and Justice: The New Papal Encyclical by Mary Evelyn Tucker and John Grim

Water Conservation and the Water- Energy Nexus at Xavier University by Nancy Bertaux, Ann Dougherty, John Hazlett, and Mark Miller

How a Simple, Inexpensive Device Makes a Three-Stone Hearth as Efficient as an Improved Cookstoveby H.S. Udaykumar, A. Kindig, S. Rao, M. Del Viscio, V. Kukillaya, N.L. Panwar, and D. Sharma

Who Bears the Burden of Fracking? by Robert Costanza

Associated Socie0es

International Society for Ecological Economics

Gund Institute Ecological Economics for

University of Vermont

National Council for Science and the Environment Improving the scientific basis for environmental decisionmaking

EARTHACTION

The Alliance for Appalachia

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) serves the na*on by providing reliable scien*fic informa*on to describe and understand the Earth.

Adam J Lewis Family Founda<on The Lewis Founda*on is a 501(c)(3) organiza*on established in 2002 by philanthropist Adam J. Lewis. The Lewis Founda*on seeks to award grants to nonprofit organiza*ons and/or individuals that are involved in environmental responsibility, green space issues and research, in addi*on to helping preserve wilderness and natural resources.

Sponsors

Solu%ons is housed at:

Ins<tute for Sustainable Solu<ons, Portland State University provides leadership and cataly*c investment from a diverse array of academic disciplines.

U.S. Environmental Protec<on Agency (US EPA) has the mission to protect human health and the environment in the United States.

Na<onal Council for Science and the Environment’s goal is to improving the scien*fic basis for environmental decisionmaking.

Crawford School of Public Policy at Australian Na<onal University, serving and influencing Australia, Asia, and the Pacific through advanced policy research, graduate, & execu*ve educa*on.

Become part of the solu<on! Become a sponsor! As a sponsor or partner of Solu%ons, you will be helping to foster solu*ons to the world’s most pressing problems. There are many ways to support Solu%ons, ranging from monetary to editorial to promo*onal. To learn how you can become part of the solu*on, go to www.thesolu*onsjournal.com/sponsor

www.thesolutionsjournal.org | July-August 2015 | Solutions | 1

Solutions Skill Sets

Solutions’ readers and contributors share some common traits, which

I’ll call “Solutions skill sets and aptitudes,” that enable us to detect problems, explore approaches, design solutions, and produce viable real-world policies, practices, and products. The evidence is right here in this issue of Solutions (as well as any back issue you might peruse):

• An interdisciplinary water-energy nexus initiative at Xavier University.

• An inexpensive device that radically increases the efficiency of a three-stone hearth.

• Embracing sustainability alliances with new and “unlikely” partners from the Pope to Chinese entrepreneurs.

• Protecting water supplies in Honduras for current and future generations through common asset trusts.

• Betting successfully on sustainable home-building in Texas.

These are just a few of the initiatives and approaches that are attributable to Solutions skill sets and aptitudes like the following:

• An adaptive mindset—the ability to pivot quickly in the face of new evidence and opportunities

• Signal to noise recognition—the ability recognize real trends and therefore opportunities

• Scenario foresight—the practice of playing out the consequences of multiple possible futures

• Systems thinking—understanding the world through the flow of energy, materials, and information

• Design doing – finding solutions through problem identification, brainstorming, prototyping, and iteration.

These skill sets allow Solutions’ contributors and readers to incorporate new evidence into our thinking, rather than clinging to outdated dogmas. When corn-based ethanol was pro-posed as a potential energy solution, agricultural ecologists ran the numbers and found that the energy return on investment was barely break-even at best, to say nothing of the effects on food systems. Most of us collectively did a quick pivot and moved on to other solutions (venture capitalists were slower to react—they lost millions).

Solutions skill sets allow us to rec-ognize the broad spatial and temporal challenges of prospective climate change, without for example, dismiss-ing future climate scenarios because of a winter cold snap or a mild summer. This is the same kind of pattern recog-nition that successful long-term market investors use. (Disturbingly, prescient investors have been buying up coastal areas in the Arctic, recognizing the potential of an ice-free polar region.)

Solutions skill sets allow us to see multiple possible opportunities and try them out in “what-if” models. The history of prognostication is littered with laughable predictions (so far)—flying cars, one world government, nuclear power too cheap to meter—and the power of scenario thinking lies in its ability to test scenarios as the future unfolds before us. We can see which assumptions are playing out, which ones aren’t, and incorporate new information iteratively.

Solutions skill sets allow us to see connections between ecological, social, and economic systems. For example, connections between “appar-ently” unrelated things like educating girls in developing countries, global population, and climate change. They allow us to see negative and positive feedback loops (most disturbingly, cascading effects), and critical leverage and intervention points.

And finally, Solutions skill sets help us design solutions more efficiently and effectively. Again, the evidence for that is right here in this issue of Solutions. Udaykumar et al. have employed a design doing methodology—problem identification, brainstorming, prototyp-ing, and iteration—to develop multiple potential solar cook stoves to replace wood stoves. But perhaps more impor-tantly, their adaptive mindset allowed them to recognize a more immediate design solution: a simple, low-cost device that can be placed within existing traditional stoves, reducing wood use, smoke, and soot, and to increase thermal efficiency within cultural norms.

This adaptive mindset may be the most important, as we’ll certainly face new information and unforeseen set-backs as we collectively pursue a more sustainable future; we’ll need to make lemons out of lemonade, or penicillin out of fungus, or microwaves out of magnetron vacuum tubes, or Viagra out of a failed angina drug (okay, maybe that’s a solution we could have skipped).

These are just the five Solutions skill sets at the top of one list. Perhaps Solutions contributors and readers have others. If so, we’d like to hear from you. So here’s a two-fold challenge:

• Suggest the top five Solutions skill sets and aptitudes (and your rationale of course) that you think are needed to foster a more sustainable future. We’ll compile and synthesize your replies and get back to you in a future issue of Solutions.

• But wait, we’re not done. Tell us how these Solutions skill sets might be promoted to less solution-minded global citizens. As the reality of ecological, social, and economic disruption is not enough to convince some of us to pitch in, maybe the intrinsic individual and small-group benefits of a Solutions skill sets will bring more people on board.

Editorial by Peter Schoonmaker

2 | Solutions | July-August 2015 | www.thesolutionsjournal.org

Features

Contents July/August 2015

Integrating Ecology and Justice: The New Papal Encyclical by Mary Evelyn Tucker and John GrimPope Francis’ Laudati Si has brought global attention to environmental and climate change issues. The historic encyclical links environmental concerns with issues of economic inequality, inextricably linking ecology and social justice. The Pope has declared that environmentalism is an ethical issue, and his message has the potential to transform climate action.

Water Conservation and the Water-Energy Nexus at Xavier Universityby Nancy Bertaux, Ann Dougherty, John Hazlett, and Mark MillerAn interdisciplinary water-energy nexus initiative at Xavier University in Ohio engages a broad working group comprised of faculty, students, officers, and consultants to identify water solutions within the campus community.

How a Simple, Inexpensive Device Makes a Three-Stone Hearth as Efficient as an Improved Cookstoveby H.S. Udaykumar, A. Kindig, S. Rao, M. Del Viscio, V. Kukillaya, N.L. Panwar, and D. SharmaTraditional Indian cookstoves are a significant source of atmospheric pollution and human health concerns. Efforts to replace traditional cookstoves with high efficiency alternatives have been largely unsuccessful, meeting widespread cultural resistance. One team of field researchers has designed an alternative solution, creating a simple device that can be placed within existing traditional stoves. The low cost device is proven to reduce wood use, smoke, and soot, and to increase thermal efficiency within cultural norms.

38

44

53


On the Web Perspectives

www.thesolutionsjournal.orgExplore the Solutions website for more content and interactivity. What are your solutions? Share your vision for a sustainable and desirable future and learn more about the Solutions community.

In Review 61The Local Economy Solution by Ryan Coonerty

Noteworthy 06An Indian Restaurant Tackles the Stigma of Women Dining AloneElectric Car-Sharing Introduced to Disadvantaged Communities in Los AngelesFemale Anti-Terror Organization Arms Mothers for Fight against ExtremismWomen-Only Center in Rural India Challenges Cultural Norms OneNYC Links Social Justice and Sustainability

Envisioning 11Looking Forward: California’s Climate Leadership by Teo Grossman The State of California has set a leading example in innovative and effective climate policy. The state’s existing and soon to be enacted policies offer a glimpse of what a sustainable future may look like.

Who Bears the Burden of Fracking? by Robert Costanza 19

Campaign to Stop Killer Robots by Maisam Alahmed 22

Confronting the “China Excuse:” The Political Logic of Climate Change Adaptation by Nives Dolšak and Aseem Prakash 27

Countries Start Taking Action against Early Marriages by Solange Azor 30

The Quest for Social Change in Digital Storytelling: An Evaluation of Hollaback! by Katherine Dumais 33

Interview 15Going Green from the Ground-Up: Cornering the Market in Sustainable Home Building Interview by Naomi Stewart TreeHouse is a successful sustainable home-building store based in Austin, Texas. A co-owner of the company, Jason Ballard speaks about making green products more accessible and affordable, having a positive impact on the green market, and the future of the sustainable home building industry.

Editorial 01Solutions Skill Sets by Peter Schoonmaker

On the Ground 69Levelling the Playing Field: Strengthening Common Property in Honduran Legislation by Amparo Cerrato Communities in Honduras are taking collective action to protect local watersheds to preserve water supplies for current and future generations. The creation of these common asset trusts must be protected through additional legislative reforms that are flexible and adaptive to common property regimes.

Solutions in History 64The Future of Britain’s Uplands: Thinking through History by Matthew Kelly The history of Britain’s uplands reveals that this landscape has been profoundly shaped by human activities. Dartmoor, one of the most celebrated of these uplands, offers a historical context for the modern dilemma of how to approach conservation efforts with the understanding that human decisions will continue to shape the land.

Idea Lab

Contributors


1. Mary Evelyn Tucker and John Grim—Tucker and Grim are the Directors of the Forum on Religion and Ecology at Yale University. Over the last 20 years, the Forum on Religion and Ecology has been drawing together the research and insights of scholars, theologians, and laity within the world’s religions. They have identified ideas, ethics, and practices regarding ecology and justice from these traditions in books, journals, and films. Now there are environmental statements from the world’s religions, educational programs, and grassroots projects on the ground. This work began with 10 confer-ences and 10 volumes at Harvard from 1996–2004. Since coming to Yale in 2006 the Forum is based at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmentally Studies and Yale Divinity School. Visit the Forum website at http://fore.yale.edu.

2. Nancy Bertaux—Nancy Bertaux (PhD, University of Michigan) is Professor of Economics at Xavier University, Cincinnati, where she co-chairs Xavier’s Sustainability Committee and teaches courses in Economics and the Environment. She is Director of two interdisciplinary degree programs, BA in Economics, Sustainability & Society, and BSBA in Sustainability: Economics & Management. She has been a Fulbright Senior Scholar in Germany, and taught in study abroad programs in Ireland and London. She has worked in the private, public, and non-profit sectors, and partici-pates in efforts to increase environmental and social sustainability. She currently rep-resents Xavier on the Greater Cincinnati Green Business Council (GCGBC).

3. H.S. Udaykumar—H. S. Udaykumar is a professor of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering at the University of Iowa. He obtained a BTech degree from the Indian

Institute of Technology and MS and PhD degrees from the University of Florida. He has been teaching at Iowa since 1999. His current work is mainly in the area of Energy, Energetics and Computer Simulations. He has done extensive work in tribal villages in Northwest India trying to find solutions to their energy needs. Udaykumar has been working to develop a stored energy solar cooker; in the meantime he and his co-authors have also been exploring other options to cut down on the use of firewood by the villagers.

4. Robert Costanza—Robert Costanza is a Chair of Public Policy at the Crawford School of Public Policy at Australian National University. Costanza is cofounder and former president of the International Society for Ecological Economics. He has authored or coauthored over 350 scientific papers and reports on his work have appeared in Newsweek, U.S. News and World Report, the Economist, The New York Times, Science, Nature, National Geographic, and National Public Radio.

5. Nives Dolšak—Nives Dolšak is a professor at the School of Marine and Environmental Affairs, University of Washington, Seattle, and a visiting professor at the Faculty of Economics, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. She has co-edited two volumes, The Drama of the Commons (National Academy of Sciences Press) and The Commons in the New Millennium: Challenges and Adaptation (the MIT Press). Her other work examines political and economic factors impacting global climate change mitigation at local, state, and national levels; linkages between commercial interests, voting, and bilateral environmental aid alloca-tion; and the diffusion of market-based environmental policy instruments.

1

2

3

4 5

SolutionsEditors-in-Chief: Robert Costanza, Ida Kubiszewski

Associate Editors: David Orr, Jacqueline McGlade

Managing Editor: Colleen Maney

Senior Editors: Christina Asquith, Jack Fairweather

History Section Editor: Frank Zelko

Book & Envisioning Editor: Bruce Cooperstein

Editors: Naomi Stewart and Dana Rawls

Graphic Designer: Kelley Dodd

Copy Editors: Nadine L. and Anna Sottile

Business Manager: Ian Chambers

Interns: Ilina Talwar, Zafirah Zein, and Solange Azor

Editorial Board: Gar Alperovitz, Vinya Ariyaratne, Robert

Ayres, Peter Barnes, William Becker, Lester Brown,

Alexander Chikunov, Cutler Cleveland, Raymond Cole, Rita

Colwell, Robert Corell, Herman Daly, Thomas Dietz, Josh

Farley, Jerry Franklin, Susan Joy Hassol, Paul Hawken,

Richard Heinberg, Jeffrey Hollender, Buzz Holling, Terry

Irwin, Jon Isham, Wes Jackson, Tim Kasser, Tom Kompas,

Frances Moore Lappé, Rik Leemans, Wenhua Li, Thomas

Lovejoy, Hunter Lovins, Manfred Max-Neef, Peter May,

Bill McKibben, William J. Mitsch, Mohan Munasinghe,

Norman Myers, Kristín Vala Ragnarsdóttir, Bill Rees,

Wolfgang Sachs, Peter Senge, Vandana Shiva, Anthony

Simon, Gus Speth, Larry Susskind, David Suzuki, John

Todd, Mary Evelyn Tucker, Alvaro Umaña, Sim van der Ryn,

Peter Victor, Mathis Wackernagel, John Xia, Mike Young

Subscriptions: http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/subscribe Email: [email protected]

Sponsoring Inquiries: http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/sponsor Email: [email protected]

On the CoverA stained glass window designed and created by Burne Jones depicts angels holding the Earth in the chapel of Harris Manchester College in Oxford, England. Pope Francis’ recent encyclical, Laudati Si, has declared that environmentalism is an ethical issue. As such, the encyclical has the potential to bring about a tipping point in the global community regarding the climate debate, not merely among Christians, but to all those attending to this moral call to action. Photo by Lawrence OP.

Solutions is subject to the Creative Commons license except where otherwise stated.


Contributors

6. Aseem Prakash—Aseem Prakash is Professor of Political Science, the Walker Family Professor for the College of Arts and Sciences, and the Director of the Center for Environmental Politics at University of Washington, Seattle. He is the General Editor of the Cambridge University Press Series in Business and Public Policy, the Co-Editor of Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, and the Associate Editor of Business & Society. He is the author of Greening the Firm (Cambridge, 2000), and co-author of The Voluntary Environmentalists (Cambridge, 2006). His co-edited books include Advocacy Organizations and Collective Action (Cambridge, 2010) and Voluntary Programs: A Club Theory Perspective (MIT Press, 2009).Solange Azor—Solange is an undergraduate student at Harvard College, graduating in 2018. She is currently working as a writer and research assistant for The Fuller Project for International Reporting based in Istanbul. She has a strong interest in global gender equality and hopes to pursue a career with a similar focus after completing her undergraduate degree.

7. Solange Azor—Solange is an undergraduate student at Harvard College, graduating in 2018. She is cur-rently working as a writer and research assistant for The Fuller Project for International Reporting based in Istanbul. She has a strong interest in global gender equality and hopes to pursue a career with a similar focus after completing her undergraduate degree.

8. Maisam Alahmed—Maisam Alahmed is currently interning as a free-lance journalist with the Fuller Project for International Reporting in Istanbul, Turkey. In the past, Maisam worked as a researcher for the Boston Consortium

for Arab Region Studies in Boston, Massachusetts and Amman, Jordan. She has also worked as a Junior Program Officer with the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention Implementation Support Unit in Geneva, Switzerland. Maisam is from Saudi Arabia. She is currently pursuing her Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs with a concentration in Middle East Studies at Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts. Maisam has also been featured in Mines Action Canada’s 30 Under 30 list highlighting the next generation of leaders in humanitarian disarmament.

9. Katherine Dumais—Katherine is a senior studying International Affairs and Economics at Northeastern University. Her research interests include Economic Development, Social Enterprise, and Women’s Rights. Previously, she worked as a Fellowship Associate at Ashoka: Innovators for the Public and on various campaigns within her university to create a campus gender resource center and better services for survivors of rape. She currently is completing an internship at RLabs, an organization working to economically empower young people through information technology in Cape Town, South Africa.

10. Naomi Stewart—Naomi is currently a Project Associate at the United Nations University—Institute for Water, Environment and Health, in the Water & Ecosystems program, and previously worked in hydrometric monitoring and water chemistry research for the Government of Canada. Naomi was also Managing Editor for the Water Quality Journal of Canada. She is a long-time freelance editor and writer that is focused on science liaison and communications, with a

research background focused primarily on water and agricultural issues and policies. Naomi holds a B.Sc. from the University of Toronto in English, Biology, and Geography, has traveled extensively to learn about global environmental practices, and strives to maintain public interest and fascination in science and nature through her blog and other ventures.

11. Amparo Cerrato—Amparo Cerrato is a Honduran lawyer who worked more than eight years in the Ministry of Forests, Protected Areas and Wildlife of her home country. During her career as a government official, she prosecuted illegal logging and poaching crimes and advised Ministers and Senators in forest policy-making. In the last five years, her work has revolved around solving forest land-tenure conflicts and legalizing land rights for local and indigenous communities living in Honduran public forests and national parks. She is currently finishing her Master’s degree in Environmental Management and Development at the Australian National University in Canberra.

12. Teo Grossman—Teo Grossman is Director of Strategic Initiatives at Bioneers. Over his career, Teo has engaged in diverse efforts including federal range management, youth and educator development, state-level assessments of long-range planning, and applied research on topics including climate change adaptation, ecosystem services, biodiversity and ecological networks. A Doris Duke Conservation Fellow during graduate school, Teo holds an MS in Environmental Science & Management from the Bren School at UC-Santa Barbara.

13. Matthew Kelly—Matthew Kelly is Associate Professor of History at the University of Southampton in the UK. He is the author of several books, including Quartz and Feldspar. Dartmoor: A British Landscape in Modern Times, published in the UK by Jonathan Cape in 2015.

14. Ryan Coonerty—Ryan Coonerty is a Supervisor for Santa Cruz County in California and a two-time former Mayor of the City of Santa Cruz. He is the cofounder of NextSpace Coworking + Innovation, a lecturer on law and government at UC Santa Cruz, and co-author of The Rise of the Naked Economy: How to Benefit from the Changing Workplace (Macmillan, 2013). He also wrote Etched in Stone: Enduring Words from our National Monuments (National Geographic, 2007). Ryan was selected by the Aspen Institute to be a Rodel Fellow in Public Leadership as one of “the nation’s most promising young elected officials.”

15. Peter Schoonmaker—Peter Schoonmaker is founding chair of the MFA in Collaborative Design at Pacific Northwest College of Art, founding president of Illahee, and past board president of Opal Creek Ancient Forest Center. Peter’s background is in nonprofit entrepreneurship and ecological research, with field experience through-out North America’s west coast as well as New England, the Rocky Mountains, Brazil, and Peru. He has worked with conservation organizations, community groups, government agencies, and natu-ral resource businesses to design local, regional and international initiatives and partnerships. He holds a BA in Biology from Colorado College, and a PhD in Organismic and Evolutionary Biology from Harvard University.

10

13

11

12 14

15

7

6

8

9


Idea LabNoteworthy

An Indian Restaurant Tackles the Stigma of Women Dining Aloneby Ilina Talwar

In many places across the world, single women dining alone are often subject to society’s disapproving looks.

In India especially, eating out alone for a woman is well beyond the cultural norm. It is difficult for women to go to restaurants alone, without being judged or constantly harassed, as men ogle them and restaurant owners ask when the rest of their party is arriving. This ideology is deeply embedded in Indian culture and is a reflection of the society’s view of women as ‘less than independent.’

Take Anasuya Basu, who recently recounted to the BBC her experience of trying to dine alone in an upscale restaurant in central Delhi. After waiting for a table for an extended period of time, she was finally offered one in a dimly lit corner. She refused to accept the table and promptly demanded to be seated elsewhere.

This kind of behavior by the restaurant staff is not uncommon and can be witnessed at several establish-ments around the city. But things may be changing in South Delhi, where a new restaurant is catering to single women looking to eat in peace, and by themselves.

Manager and chef Mary Lalboi differentiates her restaurant from others through her treatment of female customers. “I never turn away a lone woman customer no matter how busy the restaurant is. I am here to build a brand on the strength of the quality of my service and good-will to my customers.”

A rare gem, Mary Labloi’s establish-ment reflects a more forward thinking and accepting ideology. Having lived in Delhi my entire life, I don’t think I have ever dined alone. With areas such as Khan Market and Hauz Khas Village serving as social hubs, restaurants here should be more open to single women looking to grab a bite.

Riccardo Romano Restaurants in social hubs such as markets, this one in Jodhpur, India, should welcome single women.


Idea LabNoteworthy

Electric Car-Sharing Introduced to Disadvantaged Communities in Los Angelesby Zafirah Mohamed Zein

Residents of Los Angeles’ low-income neighborhoods will soon be the drivers of California’s clean energy movement with the introduction of an electric car-sharing project. The pilot program, made possible by a US$1.6 million grant by the California Air Resources Board, will make alternative transportation more available to the communities most affected by climate change.

This trailblazing initiative hopes to serve around 7000 residents in the city’s working class communities,

starting with a 100-vehicle fleet of advanced technology electric vehicles (EVs). Residents will be educated on the benefits of car sharing and clean transportation, as well as introduced to EV charging stations in their own housing developments. This will help advance Los Angeles’ Sustainable City pLAn’s 2017 goal of having 1000 public charging stations to reduce petroleum dependency and cut down greenhouse gas emissions.

These stations will push California closer to attaining its climate change goals of having 1.5 million electric vehicles on the road by 2025 and cutting petroleum use by half by 2030. This project is also in line with Senate Bill 1275, the Charge Ahead

California Initiative that was enacted last year. SB 1275 aims to ensure that low-income Californians who dispro-portionately suffer from the effects of air pollution have greater access to clean transportation.

At a neighborhood event celebrating the project, Sharon Feigon, executive director of the Shared-Use Mobility Center, said, “The size and scope of this endeavor make it an unprecedented public investment in shared mobility. This unique project will increase access to transportation for hundreds of thousands of Angelenos, while at the same time attracting new private-sector investment, increasing public aware-ness of electric vehicles, and cutting congestion and harmful emissions.”

Antonio R. VillariogosaAn electric car on display at the Electric Vehicle Conference held at the Los Angeles Civic Center in 2010.


Idea LabNoteworthy

Female Anti-Terror Organization Arms Mothers for Fight against Extremismby Zafirah Mohamed Zein

Mothers around the world are banding together as agents of change dedicated to combatting violent extremism. Mother Schools, a pioneering European project by Sisters Against Violent Extremism (SAVE), empowers women to take action against the radicalization of their youth and includes them in international peacemaking and the prevention of violent conflict. SAVE was borne out of Women Without Borders, a research-based NGO founded by Austrian activist Edit Schlaffer.

“The first school that any human being comes into contact with is the home, and the first teacher is the mother. So we are going to use this as a strategy,” said Khadijah Hawaja Gambo, one of the mobilizers spear-heading the campaign in Nigeria, in a film by SAVE.

The Mothers School model was developed as a result of SAVE workshops in Tajikistan three years ago where it was first launched. The world’s first female anti-terror platform found that women were increasingly concerned about the safety of their children and how vulnerable they were to the spread of violent extremism. Mothers Schools were thus established to equip mothers with the skills and knowledge needed to recognize and respond to early warnings of radi-calization within their families and communities. The schools received positive feedback in Tajikistan, where communities feared the rise of

Taliban ideology with the departure of American forces in 2014. Mothers Schools have since been implemented in high-risk communities across India, Nigeria, Pakistan, Zanzibar, and Indonesia.

Esther Ibanga, President of the African NGO Women Without Walls Initiative, said, “A lot of women do not even know they have that power, do not even realize that they have that much influence to shape and form their children. So I think that the Mothers Schools is teaching the women, ‘Hey, you have some power. Use it.’”

Mothers Schools are currently being implemented in Europe as Syria continues to welcome an alarming number of foreign fighters from the region. Young women are included

in those flocking to ISIS territory as recruiters connect with them on social media and lure them into becoming wives and defenders of the self-proclaimed state.

In a New York Times article, Schlaffer said of the troubling phe-nomenon, “All of a sudden, [women] have such a huge role to play in a new society—they think. We must not forget that young women are also political minds and might respond to the same push-and-pull factors as their male counterparts.”

SAVE aims to expand the Mothers Schools model into a global movement that allows women everywhere to play an active role in countering violent extremism on the home front, making them international allies in peace and security.

Vicki Francis / Department for International Development Mothers Schools empowers women to play an active role in countering violent extremism. Schools have been implemented in high risk areas, and are affecting mothers and families such as this one in Sindh, Pakistan.


Idea LabNoteworthy

Women-Only Center in Rural India Challenges Cultural Normsby Zafirah Mohamed Zein

At the edge of India’s Thar Desert, in a dusty village called Bhikamkor, women are breaking barriers and feel-ing empowered through their craft.

Known mainly to passing tourists for its historical-fort-turned-elegant hotel, Bhikamkor is also home to a caste-ridden community of 5000 people that largely relies on the land for sustenance. Its remote location leaves it neglected by the government, and its conservative society means women are even more isolated. However, this is changing with the establishment of Saheli center, a women-run community center developed by the Indian NGO Institute for Philanthropy and Humanitarian Development (IPHD). It has become a safe space for women to gain skills in handicraft work and learn the tools of financial independence.

The Saheli center is named after the fashion microenterprise Saheli Designs, currently managed by Bhikamkor’s women. Saheli is the brainchild of IPHD founder Madhu Vaishnav and Australian intern Jacklyn McCosker, who now serves as its director. Meaning ‘female friend’ in Hindi, Saheli aims to empower and connect women from all over the world through their brand of socially conscious and locally sourced products. After receiving skills train-ing from international designers and a local seamstress, 10 women are currently employed in the center and getting paid for the handmade acces-sories they produce. These products are sold in Australia, where India’s exotic style is trending among the country’s youth.

Andrew Miller The Saheli center aims to empower the women of Bhikamkor beyond traditional gender roles, connecting them to skills training, employment, and education.


Idea LabNoteworthy

In a village where there are no female doctors and 80 percent of its women are anemic, Madhu’s dreams for Saheli have the potential to trans-form the lives of Bhikamkor’s women.

Madhu admits there were initial obstacles that preceded the success of Saheli. Due to the community’s fixed perceptions of gender roles, many women are denied access to education and ways of earning an income. The women themselves also harbored doubts due to the legacy left by previous government projects that were never sustained. Furthermore, the rigid class system still entrenched in rural Indian society led to class discrimination within the Saheli com-munity at the beginning. However, a diverse bunch of women from differ-ent religions and castes now socialize and work together in the same com-pound, forming a sisterhood espoused by the message of Saheli.

“The aim is to make this com-munity thrive, not just survive,” said Madhu, who has plans to set up a women’s library, a community garden, and a mobile health clinic in Bhikamkor. “In four years we hope to bring real change.”

OneNYC Links Social Justice and Sustainabilityby Colleen Maney

This spring, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a new environmental agenda. He unveiled his plan not at City Hall, or from the iconic greens of Central Park, but from Hunt’s Point in the South Bronx—a community struggling with poverty and environmental hazards brought by multiple waste transfer stations. From the headquarters of The Point, an environmental justice organization,

de Blasio recognized what the people of Hunt’s Point know to be true: that poverty, inequality, and environmental issues are all inextricably linked.

This premise is the underlying basis for the city’s new environmental agenda, called OneNYC, and heralds a welcome departure from the city’s previous sustainability programs. OneNYC recognizes the social injustice of the city’s low-income com-munities disproportionately bearing the burdens of polluting facilities, and the factors that keep people trapped in those communities, including lack of access to workforce training, livable wages, and affordable housing.

The highly ambitious plan aims to lift 800,000 New Yorkers out of poverty over the next ten years. Some of the plan’s most potentially powerful initiatives include the following:

• Leveraging investments into green infrastructure and energy

efficiency to create training and job opportunities;

• Establishing a new “triple bottom line” for capital planning that includes economic, environmental, and social indicators;

• Investing US$30 million in community resiliency projects in the city’s most vulnerable neighborhoods;

• Establishing a Zero Waste program for large commercial waste generators and reducing commercial waste overall by 90 percent by 2030.

While the impacts of the plan are yet to be seen, OneNYC is indicative of the shift in environmentalism to recognize the relationship between climate change and economic inequal-ity. As de Blasio emphasized at a press conference, “Environmental sustain-ability and economic sustainability have to walk hand in hand.”

Kevin Case New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s new sustainability policy OneNYC recognizes the links between environmentalism and inequality.


Envisioning

As comprehensive federal policy on climate change has been

largely absent until quite recently, domestic climate leadership has emerged on multiple scales and from various jurisdictions. In particular, the State of California, long known for innovative and cutting-edge environ-mental policy, has established a climate policy approach that may well end up as a workable model for the rest of the world. Over the past decade, California has managed to decouple the growth of greenhouse gas emissions and the economy, reducing per capita emissions by 17 percent while maintaining one of the most robust economies in the country.1 The state is taking major steps forward on a yearly basis to truly take a leadership role. Projecting current policy initiatives and trends yields a potential future in which today’s policymakers, advocates, and citizens could be proud.

By 2030, based on policy already on the books or likely to be passed this calendar year, California will have reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels, and is on the way to 80 percent by 2050. At least half of the energy used will be from renewable sources, along with a 50 percent increase in fuel efficiency. Approximately one and a half million electric vehicles (EVs) will be on the road. All new construction, residential

and commercial, will be net zero energy and efficiency of existing building stock will double.2,3 California’s climate policy is poised to affect nearly every sector and issue in the state. Three specific focal areas are explored below.

Environmental JusticeAs the reality of climate disruption begins to bear down, it is clear that the burden will not be borne equally by all. Those populations and com-munities already at risk, often called frontline communities, may end up bearing a disproportionate share of the impacts from a changing climate over time. Policy measures in California that focus explicitly on environmental justice and equity concerns point

towards a possible path forward. Long a stumbling block for global climate negotiations, environmental justice advocacy efforts in California have begun to bear fruit, yielding a potentially replicable model. This year, although the law requires only 10 percent, over 30 percent of the approx-imately USD $300 million in proceeds from California’s Cap and Trade program is being directed towards solving environmental justice-related concerns. Funding for equitable and low-carbon transit, affordable housing/sustainable communities, weatherization, urban forestry, and other key issues is projected to dra-matically increase by between USD $3 and $11 billion over the next decade.4

This article is part of a regular section in Solutions in which the author is challenged to envision a future society in which all the right changes have been made.

Looking Forward: California’s Climate Leadershipby Teo Grossman

Henrk Johansson Wind mills and power lines in Patterson Pass, California.


Envisioning

As an effective and well-organized net-work of advocacy groups continues to work towards equitable climate policy in California, it will become clear that connecting the dots between cultural diversity, equity, and environmental quality is the only way to achieve real progress on any of these issues.

Natural SystemsIncreasingly, citizens, municipalities, and businesses will view healthy and resilient natural systems as not just an aesthetic and recreational asset for the state (outdoor recreation is already responsible for an estimated USD $40 billion and more than 300,000 jobs in the state as of 2008,5) but as critical infrastructure, as vital to day-to-day life for California residents as the Bay Bridge or the 405 freeway. As a result, municipalities, utilities, and busi-nesses will continue to join forces with state and federal agencies to leverage investments in the restoration of natural systems to ensure high quality and persistent provision of numerous ecosystem services. The burgeoning focus on truly green infrastructure will include: (1) investment in active forest management (e.g. appropriate fuels treatment, mountain meadow restoration, etc.) by water utilities and water-intensive businesses, such as beverage manufacturers, to ensure reli-able water supply;6 (2) conservation and restoration of coastal, inland, and mountain wetlands and floodplains for the specific purpose of provid-ing flood protection, in light of the increasing likelihood of both coastal and inland flooding from a combina-tion of rising sea levels and a rise in extreme precipitation events;7 and (3) large-scale investment in forests, rangeland, and farmland, specifically to rebuild and stabilize the carbon sequestration and storage ability of these natural systems in support of the 2050 climate goals.8

Current trends point towards con-tinued land conversion from natural and working landscapes to urban/suburban development. Much like the decoupling of economic growth and greenhouse gas emissions that the state has achieved as a result of progressive climate policy, the future will require a similarly bold policy approach to decouple economic and population growth from natural and working lands conversion. Aggressive investment and implementation of smart growth policies including mixed-use and infill development, restructuring communi-ties around transit opportunities, and generally increasing density, all of which should help to change the trajec-tory of the land conversion curve.9

AgricultureFuture climatic conditions in the Central Valley of the state are sure to lead to continued water scarcity, regardless of the eventual resolution of the current drought, as runoff timing shifts, water quality decreases, and demand grows.10 Any or all of these

factors in combination with heat-related impacts will physically and economically shift cropping patterns. As California’s fastest growing region in population, the Central Valley is poised for some major changes. At the same time, these working landscapes will play a significant role as the state moves towards its 2050 climate goals.

California’s agricultural sector will transition to hyper water-efficient, cli-mate friendly, and carbon-sequestering agricultural practices. A large-scale movement towards climate-friendly agricultural practices will both increase carbon sequestration, as well as build resilience on farms. These practices include improving water-use efficiency through drip and micro-sprinkler irrigation, improving soil management via conservation tillage, cover crops, and organic soil amend-ments, and generally shifting towards organic farming techniques, which often have a lower carbon footprint on the input side, along with a 10 to 20 percent increase in soil carbon sequestration.11

Stuart Isett / Fortune Brainstorm Green Conference attendees test drive an electric vehicle at the 2013 Fortune Brainstorm GREEN: Sustainable Solutions gathering in Laguna Niguel, California. By 2030, it is projected that approximately one and a half million electric vehicles will be in use in California.


Envisioning

Although the national food supply will adapt to changes in California’s agricultural output, local employment is less elastic, particularly for seasonal farm workers. Shifts towards value-added crops and products will help, as will ongoing renewable energy devel-opment in the region, which is poised to provide steady, long-term, family supporting jobs.12 The inevitable development of stricter oversight and/or banning of fracking in locations like Kern County brings into sharper focus the potential for robust growth of clean energy development in the region.13 Kern County, in fact, hosts one of the largest wind energy farms in the coun-try, with more to come. Neighboring Tulare County has already had 18

utility-grade solar projects approved in the past two years, with hundreds of associated jobs.14 A policy approach prioritizing balance between farmland conservation, on-farm renewable energy projects, and large-scale energy development on unproductive lands will be essential.

The distributed energy revolution is on its way to the farm with reported on-farm renewable energy projects tripling from 2009 to 2012, with further growth basically inevitable. Renewable energy projects will be developed on disturbed land, brown-fields, and other less-than-pristine locations, such as the thousands of acres already taken out of production due to salinity in the Westlands Water

District, presently slated for one of the world’s largest solar plants.15,16

California is not, and will not, be a panacea for all environmental concerns. The challenges posed by climate change are vast and varied.17 Groundwater overdraft continues, and it may be decades before new regula-tions pay off. The fire season is nearly three months longer, on average, than it was 40 years ago, and lack of moisture combined with high tem-peratures will lead to ongoing massive wildfires. Population will continue to grow, projected to reach 50 million by mid-century, along with associated demands on resources and infrastruc-ture.18 Automobiles still remain the iconic transportation option in the

Charlton Clemens More sustainable agricultural practices are indicative of a general shift towards organic farming techniques, such as those employed on this organic farm outside of San Diego.


Envisioning

state and, even with one and a half million EVs on the road, there are still another 30 million or more tailpipe-laden vehicles on crowded streets.19 However, in light of current and future challenges, the state is making substantial progress on multiple fronts, while riding a groundswell of popular opinion and providing a glimpse of how a sustainable future might look.

References1. Hayden, T. California Climate Leadership. Presented at

the Bioneers Conference (2014).2. Brown, E. 2015 California Governor’s Inaugural

Address. Office of Governor Edward G. Brown, Jr. [online] (2015) http://gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18828.

3. de Leon, K et al. Full 2015 Climate Bill Package. California State Senate [online] (2015) http://focus.senate.ca.gov/climate/full-package.

4. Truong, V. California Leadership in Climate Change. Presented at the Bioneers Conference (2014).

5. Loomis, J. California Outdoor Recreation Economic Study: Statewide Contributions and Benefits. BBC Research & Consulting for California State Parks (2011).

6. Waage, S. Lessons on societal and business vulnerability and resilience. The Economist (October 29, 2014).

7. Traverso, J. CDFW Awards $21 Million in Grants for Greenhouse Gas Reduction Projects. California Department of Fish and Wildlife [online] (2015) https://cdfgnews.wordpress.com/2015/04/30/cdfw-awards-21-million-in-grants-for-greenhouse-gas-reduction-projects/.

8. Nichols, M et al. First Update to the AB 32 Scoping Plan. California Air Resources Board (2014).

9. Alex, K. The Governor’s Environmental Goals and Policy Report: California @ 50 Million. Draft for Discussion (Draft for Discussion). California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (2013).

10. Van Lienden, B, A. Munévar, and T. Das. West-Wide Climate Risk Assessment: Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins Climate Impact Assessment. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (2014).

11. Merrill, J. Climate and Agriculture. Presented at the Bioneers Conference (2014).

12. Hecht, P. Vanishing water, fewer jobs, but still hope in the Central Valley. The Sacramento Bee (February 21, 2015).

13. Hayden, T. The Great Unifier: California Against Climate Change. The Democracy Journal. (May 20, 2014).

14. Stackhouse-Kaelble, S. Special Investment Report: California’s Central Valley. Area Development (2014).

15. Defenders of Wildlife. Recommendations for Implementing Smart from the Start Renewable Energy Siting. Central Valley Renewable Energy Project (2012).

16. Woody, T. Solar Projects Envisioned on Dry California Farmland. The New York Times (August 10, 2010).

17. Hanak, E. California’s Future: Climate Change. PPIC (2015).

18. Alex, K. The Governor’s Environmental Goals and Policy Report: California @ 50 Million. Draft for Discussion (Draft for Discussion). California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (2013).

19. Crowfoot, W. California Climate Leadership. Presented at the Bioneers Conference (2014).

John Prettyman / US Army Corps of Engineers Several utility-grade solar projects have been approved in the state in recent years. Here, a solar microgrid project installed by the US Army Corps of Engineers in the Sacramento district.


InterviewIdea Lab

W ith changing consumer choices and a shift towards sustainable products,

one thing that doesn’t always come to mind is our own homes. From the paintbrushes to the flooring, most conventional home-building products are built cheaply, with dangerous chemicals and unsustainable resources. In response to this gap, Jason Ballard opened up a now-successful sustain-able home-building store called TreeHouse with a friend. Found in a sunny lot in Austin, Texas, TreeHouse offers a preselected range of sustainable products, demonstra-tions, and services, all while creating space for like-minded companies—making the world greener, one plank at a time.

What sets Treehouse apart from the other primary home-building retailers on the market like Home Depot? Haven’t other companies tried to go the ‘green’ route?TreeHouse is certainly not a discount store, but we don’t see ourselves as a premium retailer, nor are we trying to be. If only two percent of all homes become sufficient or sustainable, then we are not moving the needle. So while we would love to be top-end in terms of quality, we would love to be middle market in terms of price, because you can have the greatest impact through volume.

A number of other companies have tried to do what we are doing, but they have always approached it as small, boutique-style mom-and-pop stores. This means customers will get bou-tique pricing and then the companies

Going Green from the Ground-Up: Cornering the Market in Sustainable Home BuildingAn interview with Jason Ballard, TreeHouse co-ownerInterviewed by Naomi Stewart

TreeHouse Jason Ballard speaks at the 2015 Annual Magazine Release Party at TreeHouse.


InterviewIdea Lab

force themselves into becoming an overpriced niche and close up quickly. It has been one of our clear goals from the beginning to lower costs across the industry, and not just for us. We are not the first ones to have the idea of sustainable building, but are the first ones to put it together in a viable way with a long-term business model.

You said you came up with the idea for sustainable building products when you were living in Colorado and working in sustainable development, but then you met Garrett Boone, your main investor and the founder of the Container Stores. How did that happen?Garrett was one of our earliest investors—we were basically at the

beginning of the road, and we were hearing a lot of no’s from potential investors. The recession had just started and a lot of medium-sized businesses were going out of business. During a lot of the rejections, some people would still have suggestions for people we could to talk to, and his name come up. Garrett was really enthusiastic about the idea—he told us it would be hard, but he moved from an investor to a primary investor, and then eventually the chairman of the board. He is the owner of one of the most legendary retailers in America, so to have him as a mentor to navigate the waters of opening up a new product category, we couldn’t have a better guy on board.

When you are talking about lower costs for sustainable products, is that referring to products or a reduction in socio-economic costs on a larger scale? How can you accomplish that with so many low-cost (unsustainable) goods available?Yeah, I believe all of that—what’s holding things back on a larger scale is that people feel like they can’t afford these things today. So we have to lower at-the-shelf product costs. To accom-plish that, we need volume. One little boutique store buying 20 products a month is not going to change things; TreeHouse needs to be a large foot-print store, be moving truckloads of products, and that is how you get the economies of scales that are needed.

TreeHouse TreeHouse is a sustainable home-building store in Austin, Texas.


InterviewIdea Lab

It seems like there aren’t necessarily a lot of local sustainable home-building products on the market—so where are you sourcing them from?So TreeHouse has a ‘product filter’ method with four different elements. One is sustainability (product life cycles), health (using the red list chemi-cals), quality (how does it perform), and responsibility (we partner with other responsible companies), and the products are measured by where they fit in there, which offers choice to con-sumers. Then, in purchasing supplies, we first try to buy local products in the category we want. If nothing is avail-able, then we’ll try within a 500-mile radius, then the entire country, and if not, then finally we will look abroad. However, we value the local concept, and so TreeHouse does everything we can to find the various products as close as possible.

So TreeHouse is essentially a middle-man between consumers and suppliers in a novel niche market—have you found that suppliers have also increased while your business has been open? What impacts do you think you can have on consumer choices?Yes, there has been an increase, and in many cases of our network, that’s a direct result of TreeHouse’s impact. For instance, there was a wool installation company that is about to come to market, but part of the way they got funding was showing their investors a product order from us. This shows that there was demand for their type of product. If they hadn’t been able to show that a company like TreeHouse was already interested, then they would have never been able to be funded and open this type of new sustainable company. We hope to continue creating a footprint for sustainable products and have a positive impact on generating

other new companies, ultimately creating a whole new sustainable community all in the service of making homes and the planet better.

In terms of customers, in our first year, people that were coming in were not even aware you could get things like recycled carpets. The second year, we were expanding and still finding ourselves, and during the last year of operations our sales have doubled. So the interest in these types of products is definitely growing, which is positive.

Of all the places you could have picked to open up your flagship store, why Texas? Have you noticed an increase in the radius of your customer base at all?We did market research and thought about opening up in Boulder since we were there, but all the signs pointed to Texas. Some people claim that green building term was coined in Austin in 1992–1993, so there’s a long history of sustainable thinking here. The state has favorable policies, the market is large enough, and so the basis of awareness already existed. And then the cherry on the top, both myself and the other co-owner is from here, so it was perfect.

Ninety-five percent of our custom-ers are from Texas, but people do come from far away to access these products—if you really want to build your home with green ideas, there’s

nowhere you can really go. The other day, when we arrived to open up, there were customers that had driven in three hours to come to the shop.

That’s not happening every day, but it is happening more and more, so it’s a good sign.

What are lessons you have learned during the past three years of TreeHouse being open?I would say that what I’ve learned is that when we do something that we are most proud of, making choices that are better for the environment, com-munity, or social responsibility, they have always gone well for us. In our range of product selections, we were offering a choice of conventional prod-ucts. Over time these goods, which we were the least proud of, ended up being the worst-selling products in every category. So by the end of the first year, we just abandoned the idea—it was something we never wanted anyway. So every time we make a decision like that, whether it’s customer service or product selection, the truer we stay to our values, the better it has gone financially, which is not something the world tells you. The world is telling you that people are unthinking, price-sensi-tive, and don’t care about sustainability. People do really think about value and quality and have philosophies and ideas about what a good life looks like.

I would say that what I’ve learned is that when we do something that we are most proud of, making choices that are better for the environment, community, or social responsibility, they have always gone well for us.


InterviewIdea Lab

The other discovery (from an inter-nal operations perspective) is in terms of the people we hire—their CV may say one thing, but we have a values-driven hiring process instead. Some people have great resumes but are not a great cultural or value-based fit, and so we have learned to value that over their resume. This also lowers turnover rate.

We’ve also tried to be unafraid of change and unafraid of failure. We are changing in response to seeing what works best, as fast as we can. We are invested in this internally because we really believe in what we are doing—but it’s a lot of hard work!

So what’s next for TreeHouse? What about the industry of sustainable home-building products in general?We want to continue to grow inter-nally first—find better ways to do things. For instance, our new rainwa-ter harvesting program or a zero waste program to help homeowners reduce their waste stream. We are also inter-ested in geographical growth—getting it into other cities.

For the industry, I would love to re-imagine forestry for North America. Trees are an incredibly renewable resource, and wood is one of the most multifaceted building materials available. So that could be TreeHouse

developing a sustainable forestry pro-gram or investing in other companies that are operating that way, or perhaps creating our own division. Right now, there are no large-scale, exclusively sustainable forestry operations in North America, which is a real shame. There are places like Germany, which is a great example of what healthy for-estry should look like, but they have not caught on here unfortunately. It’s all an issue of scale—when TreeHouse has 100 stores that are all ready to buy sustainable wood products, we can change the landscape of sustainable forestry and hope that other people follow suit.

TreeHouse TreeHouse offers a pre-selected range of sustainable products, such as non-toxic paints.


Perspectives

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a report in

June 2015 about the environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing (frack-ing) on water resources.1 Fracking is a technique to extract oil and gas from shale deposits. While the report appeared to give the industry a clean bill of health as far as water quality is concerned—the report found “no evidence that fracking led to widespread, systematic pollution of water”—there are enough uncertain-ties in the data and its interpretation to raise concerns, many of which relate to specific, local pollution, as

well as other impacts. The report’s ambiguous conclusions have been seized upon by both sides of the debate, due to the huge remaining uncertainties. While the report seems to vindicate fracking as basi-cally safe, it can also be interpreted as confirming specific cases of impacts and a call for more research and better oversight. Just because no evidence was found of widespread pollution, does not mean that no evidence will ever be found. In addi-tion, even if fracking does not lead to widespread pollution, it can and has led to specific, local pollution.

The amount of fracking going on in the US and around the world is huge, and the risks are mounting. The EPA report says:

We estimate 25,000–30,000 new wells were drilled and hydrauli-cally fractured annually in the United States between 2011 and 2014.

The report goes on to conclude that:

Of the potential mechanisms identified in this report, we found specific instances where one or more mechanisms led to impacts on drinking water resources, including contamina-tion of drinking water wells. The number of identified cases, however, was small compared to the number of hydraulically fractured wells.

So, of the 100,000 to 120,000 new wells drilled in the US since 2011, only a ‘small’ number led to the contamination of drinking water wells. For example, in terms of the frequency of spills of hydraulic frac-turing fluids—only one of the several possible routes of contamination—it was estimated that: “the number of spills nationally could range from approximately 100 to 3,700 spills annually.”

In addition, there is admittedly poor data on the impacts of fracking, so the ‘no evidence’ caveat is impor-tant. The EPA says:

There is insufficient pre- and post-hydraulic fracturing data on the quality of drinking water resources. This inhibits a determination of the frequency of impacts. Other limiting factors include the presence of other causes of contamination,

Who Bears the Burden of Fracking?by Robert Costanza

Erick Gustafson A recent EPA report revealed that there remains significant uncertainty about the impacts of fracking.


Perspectives

the short duration of exist-ing studies, and inaccessible information related to hydraulic fracturing activities.

So, while there are several known cases of drinking water contamination from fracking, most wells do not seem to cause these problems, with the important caveat being that the data that would allow us to see the impacts is very poor.

In addition, the report does not mention what may be the gravest danger to arise from fracking: the con-nection between increased wells and earthquakes. Between 1973 and 2008, before fracking, there were, on aver-age, 21 earthquakes of a magnitude

three and larger in the central and eastern U.S. In contrast, in 2014 alone there were 659. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is conducting a study into the surge in quakes.

The bottom line is that there remains a lot of uncertainty about the impact of fracking.

What are government agencies doing to manage this situation? Currently, individual states are permit-ting fracking with some regulations attached, with the assumption that there will be no adverse impacts. If impacts are found, individuals or environmental groups can take legal action, but the burden of proof is on the injured parties. These parties are often property owners who do not have

the financial resources to battle the drilling companies in court, and even if they did, the legal process is long and tedious, with little guarantee that dam-ages will ultimately be awarded.

This unbalanced arrangement that rewards risk-taking by companies in relation to the environment can be devastating. For example, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill incident resulted from inadequate attention to the risks that the public was left to bear. Precautionary measures were known, but not taken. Investments in safety devices (like the acoustic blow-out preventer) were not made. Corners were cut. The pursuit of short-term private profits motivated taking high risks with public assets.

The Weekly Bull Protestors opposing fracking in London in January 2015.


Perspectives

Fracking, like deep water drilling, could be better managed by reversing the burden of proof.2 This implies requiring corporations and other private interests to internalize and monetize their risks to public goods. In many other parts of society, we require private interests to buy insurance to deal with the risks they impose on the public. For example, purchasing auto-mobile insurance is now mandatory, and assurance bonds are often required from building contractors and mine operators for reclamation. Requiring assurance bonds or insurance forces private interests to internalize the risk of their activities before any damages occur. It gives them strong financial incentives to reduce risk, since it is their own money that they stand to lose.

One way to monetize the risks of fracking would be to require private interests to post an ‘assur-ance bond’ large enough to cover the worst-case damages.3 Portions of the bond (plus interest) would be returned if and when the private interests could demonstrate that the suspected worst-case damages had not occurred or would be less than was originally assessed. If damages did occur, portions of the bond would be used to rehabilitate or repair the environment and to compensate injured parties. The critical feature is that the risk to the public asset is apparent to the private interests in financial terms before the fact, and not as a liability that may or may not be enforced after the damage occurs.

The EPA and State environmental management agencies have it within their power to require assurance bonds for fracking. Good, safe opera-tors should have no problem with this requirement, and it could also reduce the time needed for approval. Posting a large enough bond would convince management agencies that the operators would do everything possible to prevent impacts, reduc-ing the need for other regulations. Sloppy operators would be quickly driven out of the market. In all cases, the fracking operations would be performed more carefully, with strict attention to protecting the public asset. If damages did occur, there would be ready access to the financial resources to rectify the problem and compensate those affected. Two important considerations are that: (1) the size of the bond must be large enough to cover the worst case damages, and (2) the financial burden for monitoring the before and after environmental conditions should be on the operator, not the public.

Assurance bonds, properly applied, can shift the burden of proof for the impact of fracking to the parties that stand to gain from the activity, which is where it belongs. These bonds can internalize the risks of the activity and allow market incentives to work to protect the environment and the public.

References1. EPA’s Study of Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and

Gas and Its Potential Impact on Drinking Water Resources. United States Environmental Protection Agency [online] (2015) http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy.

2. Costanza, R et al. The perfect spill: solutions for averting the next Deepwater Horizon. Solutions 1(5), 17–20 [online] (2010) http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/node/629.

3. Costanza, R & Perrings, C. A flexible assurance bonding system for improved environmental management. Ecological Economics 2, 57–76 (1990).

Adam Welz / CREDO Action An anti-fracking demonstration in New York.


Perspectives

When watching a film or imag-ining a future life similar to

something seen in a movie like The Terminator or I, Robot, we seldom feel that the concept of facing killer robots are an actual threat in real life.

But what if killer robots are the feasible next step in developing weap-ons and technology? Killer robots are no longer a concept limited to sci-fi movies; they are being developed today, utilizing technology that could emerge in the near future. Can you imagine what it would be like to stand in front of an armed robot, which is not controlled by any human near or far, while that robot decides whether or not to use force against you? The image in itself should send a shiver right down your spine, but what should really frighten you is that this idea is not far from becoming a reality.

From Sci-Fi to RealityThe advancement of weaponry tech-nology over the last century has been dramatic. We have developed weapons from canons, to guns, to atomic bombs, and to armed drones. It has now become part of human nature to quickly move on to the next big thing, and use technology to invent some-thing that simplifies our lives or jobs. Unfortunately, we hardly ever think ahead to what these new developments and inventions could mean in terms of legality, but most importantly, in terms of human cost and the preservation of human life and dignity.

Lethal autonomous weapons systems, also known as killer robots, are a new type of weapons technology that will have the ability to select targets and use force at that target without any human intervention. This

emerging weapons system has become hotly discussed in the international community, and was most recently discussed at the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) at the United Nations in Geneva.1 These autonomous weapons pose fundamen-tal challenges to the compliance with human rights law (HRL) and interna-tional humanitarian law (IHL).

As human beings, how can we allow robots that lack human judgment or empathy to understand different situations, circumstance, and environ-ments, make life or death decisions for other human beings? Many believe that this characteristic, or lack thereof, crosses a fundamental moral line. Autonomous weapons would certainly pose a challenge in the battlefield when distinguishing between a soldier and a civilian, between a combatant and a

Campaign to Stop Killer Robotsby Maisam Alahmed

Campaign to Stop Killer Robots The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots is a coalition of human rights groups fighting to preemptively address the emerging issue of autonomous weapons systems.


Perspectives

child. It will lack the capability to evalu-ate its surroundings as a human would and could misjudge the proportionality of an attack. All of these traits, which only humans are capable of, will be lacking in an autonomous weapon, making their use a violation of both HRL and IHL. Because even in terrible times of war, we have established an international convention, IHL, that bind us to certain ethics, such as not harming civilians and treating prisoners of war with dignity.

The decision to enter into war should not be taken lightly. Before anything, there is always the cost of human life to bear in mind when making such decisions. One must

consider the soldiers who will be sac-rificing their lives in the name of their country, their grieving families, and the impact of such loss on the state as a whole. Deploying machines instead of soldiers to fight in wars will remove the human factor from the attacking state’s perspective, likely making it easier to go to war without putting the lives of its own citizens at risk. This in return will increase the possibility of human casualties in the attacked state, which consequently creates another issue these weapons create, one of accountability.

In the case of civilian casualty, who could be held accountable for the robot’s actions? Would it be the

commander, the programmer, or the manufacturer? Someone needs to be held accountable in the case of human causality, and it can’t be the machine. You can’t take a robot to court. With this accountability gap, there is little incentive to create a robot that will not endanger civilian life, when there is no clarity on who is responsible for the robot’s harmful actions.

China, Israel, Russia, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States are all countries with high-tech militaries that have autonomous weapons systems in development with various degrees of human control. If at least one of these nations

Cluster Munition Coalition The Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons fourth review conference in 2011.


Perspectives

makes the decision to deploy a fully autonomous weapon in a conflict, as has been done with the use of armed drones, who’s to say that the others won’t follow suit? It will create a situation of asymmetric warfare, where other countries, especially opponents, will want to get hold of similar weapons so as to not be left behind or threatened. This very pos-sible scenario could quickly lead the world into a robotic arms race, even while the international community still struggles to limit the potential damage of the nuclear arms race.

Killing ‘Killer Robots’It is essential, now more than ever, to address the threat of these weapons by preemptively banning their develop-ment. While a handful may argue that a treaty on addressing a weapon that doesn’t exist yet is too difficult to achieve, it has been done before when blinding lasers were banned by a UN Protocol in 1995. Killer robots must be addressed now before they are developed, otherwise it would be even more difficult to establish control over their creation and deployment after they are fully utilized.

In October 2012, nine interna-tional NGOs came together to start a campaign that would address the emerging issue of autonomous weapons system. Human Rights Watch,2 Article 36,3 Association for Aid and Relief Japan,4 International Committee for Robots Arms Control (ICRAC),5 Mines Action Canada,6 Nobel Women’s Initiative,7 PAX

(formerly known as IKV Pax Christi),8 Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs,9 and Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom worked collaboratively to launch the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots in April 2013.10,11 The Campaign is “an international coali-tion that is working to preemptively ban fully autonomous weapons.”

Professor Noel Sharkey, ICRAC chair, first brought world attention to this issue in an August 18, 2007 article in The Guardian titled, “Robot Wars are a Reality.”12 Different members of

the campaign have published reports and hosted events aimed at addressing the legal, humanitarian, and technical perspectives involved.

The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots works to bring attention to the issue of killer robots and urge action to ban these weapons. It participated in the second informal meeting of experts of the CCW from April 13 to 17, 2015 at the UN offices in Geneva, where it joined repre-sentatives from 90 governments, UN agencies, and The International Committee of the Red Cross at the second meeting of experts on lethal autonomous weapons systems.14 At the CCW’s Meeting of the High Contracting Parties to the Convention in November, nations will have to officially decide whether to continue the CCW deliberations in 2016 or dedicate more time to a more substantive process with a tangible outcome.

The Solution: Stopping Killer Robots before they StartHuman control of any weapon is both essential and necessary to guarantee the compliance of international law and the preservation of human life and dignity. The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots seeks to ensure that the human factor is not taken out of targeting and attacking decisions.

A full preemptive ban on the development, production, and use of these weapon systems through an international treaty is the only feasible solution to eradicate the threat that these weapons pose. The treaty should put into consideration the ethical, legal, technical, and humanitarian concerns that have been raised not only by the Campaign and other organizations, but also by the concerns posed by a number of countries and governments, highlighted in several statements that were made during the CCW meetings on lethal autonomous weapons systems.15

Additionally, the Campaign sum-marizes the appropriate approach to ban these weapons by emphasizing the recommendations made in the 2013 report on these weapons by the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Professor Christof Heyns.16 These recommendations are stated as followed:

• Place a national moratorium on lethal autonomous robots (Paragraph 118).

• Declare—unilaterally and through multilateral fora—a commitment to abide by International Humanitarian Law and international human rights law in all activities surrounding robot weapons and put in place and implement rigorous processes to ensure compliance at all stages of development (Paragraph 119).

The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots seeks to ensure that the human factor is not taken out of targeting and attacking decisions.


Perspectives

• Commit to being as transparent as possible about internal weapons review processes, including metrics used to test robot systems. States should at a minimum provide the international community with transparency regarding the processes they follow (if not the substantive outcomes) and commit to making the reviews as robust as possible (Paragraph 120).

• Participate in international debate and trans-governmental dialogue on the issue of lethal autonomous robots, be prepared to exchange best practices with other states, and collaborate with the High Level Panel on lethal autonomous robotics (Paragraph 121).

The Way ForwardThe issue of killer robots has been discussed informally within the inter-national community for almost two years now. Following the deliberations in Geneva this past April, the time to progress to the next step is now. The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots is pushing states to begin formal negotia-tions to create a new CCW protocol on autonomous weapons.

There is a huge emphasis from the Campaign that further CCW deliberations should not only consider transparency measures. The first step that is required, which was empha-sized by a number of states and by the Campaign through a letter to the chair of the Convention, is to create a Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) during the CCW’s annual meeting in November 2015. The GGE is a known method that has been used within the CCW for the past two decades to address issues and concerns of various types of weapons.

The GGE would be open to all states as well as accredited NGOs. The GGE could provide essential

documents in the six official UN languages which would help encourage participation by as many countries and organizations as possible. Furthermore, a GGE could dedicate more time to hold meetings in 2016 to provide in-depth analysis of crucial issues such as meaningful human control. Finally, a GGE would facilitate more concrete outcomes and push the issue to be discussed in formal negotiations. This will help governments and NGOs to pave the way to establish a negotiating mandate in the Fifth CCW Review Conference in 2016.

To date, no nation has clearly stated that they are pursuing this new weaponry system. During the CCW’s informal meetings in April 2015, only two countries, Israel and the US, have indicated that they are not leaving any option out when it comes to acquiring this type of tech-nology. On the other hand, Canada, France, Japan, and the UK have all clearly stated that they have no

interest in pursuing the development of such weapons. However, none have expressed explicit support for a preemptive ban on killer robots.

At the meeting, campaigners took on the perception that these weapons are “inevitable.” “I must note that we are beaten over the head that killer robots are inevitable. ‘Inevitable’ is disempowering and deadening. If something is inevitable, there is no use in trying to change that inevitability,” stated Nobel Peace Laureate Jody Williams of the Nobel Women’s Initiative, a co-founder of the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, at the CCW meeting in April.

The concept of human control was the center of much of the debate at the CCW meetings on killer robots held in 2014 to 2015. A weapon that can fully function on its own without the interference of a human operator should never come to exist. This technology would violate basic international law and cross a dangerous moral line threatening

Campaign to Stop Killer Robots A workshop session hosted by the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots shortly after the coalition’s creation in April 2013. The Campaign is comprised of nine international NGOs.


Perspectives

the preservation of human life and dignity. Trying to improve these weapons to make them “better” or “safer” should not be a viable solution.

“We absolutely reject the notion that we as human beings do not have control over deciding our own future. We reject the notion that killer robots are inevitable. They are only inevitable if those in this room and countless others around the world who oppose lethal weapons without meaningful human control are willing to roll over and allow the not necessarily inevi-table to become a deadly and terrifying reality,” said Williams. A preemptive ban is the only viable solution to avoid the legal and humanitarian threats that these weapons could impose if ever created and deployed.

Sharon Ward / Campaign to Stop Killer Robots An NGO conference hosted by the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots in 2013.

References1. The Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.

United Nations Office at Geneva [online] (2015) http://www.unog.ch/80256EE600585943/%28httpPages%29/4F0DEF093B4860B4C1257180004B1B30?OpenDocument.

2. Human Rights Watch [online] (2015) http://www.hrw.org/.

3. Article 36 [online] (2015) http://www.article36.org/.4. Association for Aid and Relief, Japan [online] (2015)

http://www.aarjapan.gr.jp/english/.5. The International Committee for Robot Arms

Control (ICRAC) [online] (2015) http://icrac.net/.6. Stop Killer Robots Canada [online] (2015)

http://stopkillerrobots.ca/.7. Nobel Women’s Initiative [online] (2015)

http://nobelwomensinitiative.org/.8. Pax Christi [online] (2015)

http://www.paxvoorvrede.nl/.9. Pugwash Conferences of Science and World Affairs

[online] (2015) http://pugwash.org/.10. Women’s International League for Peace

and Freedom [online] (2015) http://www.wilpfinternational.org/.

11. Campaign to Stop Killer Robots [online] (2015) http://www.stopkillerrobots.org/.

12. Sharkey, N. Robot wars are a reality. The Guardian [online] (2007) http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/aug/18/comment.military.

13. Chronology. Campaign to Stop Killer Robots [online] (2015) http://www.stopkillerrobots.org/chronology/.

14. 2015 Meeting of Experts on LAWS. United Nations Office at Geneva [online] (2015) http://www.unog.ch/80256EE600585943/%28httpPages%29/6CE049BE22EC75A2C1257C8D00513E26?OpenDocument.

15. 2015 Meeting of Experts on LAWS. United Nations Office at Geneva [online] (2015) http://www.unog.ch/80256EE600585943/%28httpPages%29/6CE049BE22EC75A2C1257C8D00513E26?OpenDocument.

16. Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns. Human Rights Council Twenty-third session, United Nations General Assembly [online] (2013) http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session23/A-HRC-23-47_en.pdf.


Perspectives

In July of this year, President Obama announced a plan to reduce carbon

dioxide emissions from electricity gen-eration by 32 percent from 2005 levels by the year 2030. As anticipated, this has kicked off a furious debate, with critics characterizing Obama’s Clean Power Plan as a job killer, and offering the “China excuse” for opposing it. After all, why should the US reduce emissions when China, the biggest current emitter of greenhouse gases, has not committed to mandatory reduc-tions? This is a powerful argument in a period of economic crisis, growing income inequalities, and the fear that American jobs are being shipped abroad to countries such as China that have not committed to mandatory emission reductions.

The scientific case for carbon mitigation is a powerful one. Societies need to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases before the tipping point occurs. Various reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) attest to the need for climate change mitigation. Exhortations by prominent global leaders such as Pope Francis and inter-governmental efforts, such as the upcoming COP21 conference in Paris, are examples of the continued policy focus on mitigation.

Yet, mitigation-based approaches have run into serious political prob-lems. Furthermore, it is not clear how countries such as China and India are going to enforce mitigation targets domestically, even if they were to be persuaded to sign on to mandatory emission reductions. As the vast litera-ture on international treaties produced by political scientists suggests, compli-ance with these agreements tends to be patchy.

Instead of investing political capi-tal predominantly towards mitigation, we suggest re-orienting the policy focus and paying serious attention to adaptation to climate change. Examples of climate change adapta-tion measures include using scarce water resources more efficiently, adapting building codes to take into account future climate condi-tions and extreme weather events, and developing drought-tolerant crops.1 The issues of drought, water shortages, food shortages, rising sea levels, and over-worked electricity grids need to be addressed urgently.2 Scholars, national governments, cities, international organizations, and the IPCC acknowledge the importance of adaptation.3 Yet, in terms of devoting real resources, adaptation is being neglected. This needs to change.

Devoting political and economic resources to adaptation will eventually create the political momentum for serious, not just symbolic, mitigation policies. When citizens are asked to pay for adaptation, they will begin to recognize the true costs of global climate change for their communities and for their own well-being. For example, the local government of a coastal city imposes a new tax on households to pay for a new seawall that can withstand rising sea levels; an electric utility imposes a surcharge on its customers to pay for a new grid that can handle peak power demands due to high summer temperatures; or the water utility company introduces a water levy to pay for water harvesting structures it is installing in order to respond to changing rainfall patterns characterized by short but intense

Confronting the “China Excuse:” The Political Logic of Climate Change Adaptationby Nives Dolšak and Aseem Prakash

Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores The President of Bolivia, Evo Morales, speaks at the opening plenary of COP20 in Lima, Peru in 2014. The Annual COP conferences are prime examples of global policy focus on carbon mitigation.


Perspectives

downpours with huge water runoff. Faced with these new costs, citizens will begin to appreciate the implica-tions, for them, of not addressing climate change.4 Consequently, citizens will hopefully be less likely to invoke the “China excuse” for policy inaction and be more willing to support climate change mitigation. Viewed in this way, adaptation can be interpreted as a temporary, but strategic, withdrawal to educate citizens of the dangers of ignoring climate change.

The political opposition to mitiga-tion has multiple justifications. As political scientists have shown, poli-cies that impose concentrated costs on a few actors, but create diffused ben-efits for others, are likely to meet with strong opposition.5,6 Second, this oppo-sition is accentuated when these costs are incurred by the “policy losers” in the short run, while the benefits can be observed only in the long run. Third, if these benefits are non-excludable, meaning it is difficult to exclude others from benefiting from climate change mitigation, this creates a “free rider” problem.7 Since few want to be “suckers,” actors will be reluctant to incur costs in order to create benefits that the free riders can enjoy. Fourth, the opposition to the proposed policy is likely to be especially acute if the policy losers perceive the alleged free-rider to be a political and economic competitor who is steadily gaining advantage across multiple issues.

The political opposition to mitiga-tion lies in the fact that mitigation imposes costs on the US fossil fuel and energy intensive sectors while provid-ing benefits that may occur in the long run to a large number of unspecified people anywhere on the globe. Not surprisingly, policy losers oppose mitigation policies. Furthermore, the backlash against mitigation might be attributed to the rising economic and political salience of China, the

perception that American jobs are being shipped overseas, and that China continues to build coal-fired electricity plants while Americans are asked to cut down on emissions. For the West Virginia miner, mitigation implies she/he will lose the major source of her/his livelihood in order to subsidize affluent Chinese or Indian consumers. It is difficult to explain to this miner, who is facing economic stress, that equity considerations demand that we look at cumulative instead of current emissions.

In contrast to mitigation, the politi-cal logic of adaptation is compelling. While successful mitigation requires global collective action, adapta-tion can be successful even when undertaken unilaterally. Importantly, adaptation-related investments create local benefits, not global public goods. Thus, adaptation does not suffer from the free rider problem—those paying for it will also benefit from it. It is difficult to offer the “China excuse” for ignoring adaptation.

Adaptation-based approaches can leverage the polycentric governance model that scholars at the Vincent and Elinor Ostrom Workshop in Political Theory and Policy analysis have developed. The core idea is that dif-ferent collective goods are efficiently provided at different scales.8,9 Instead of asking a single governance unit, say the federal government, to provide all public goods, both scholars and prac-titioners should look at varying scales of such provision. Furthermore, the provision of public goods at different scales means that benefit spillovers can be minimized, and those benefit-ing from the policy can be expected to incur the costs as well. If adaptation requires city-level efforts, then the city government can undertake the invest-ments. If it requires efforts of multiple jurisdictions, special adaptation districts can be created (such as school

districts or water districts). The bottom line is that adaptation can be designed for any scale to ensure that: (1) it is provided at the most efficient scale; and, (2) beneficiaries of adaptation-related investments pay for much of the costs. In doing so, adaptation meets the canon of efficiency and, at the same time, minimizes free riding.

We recognize that adaptation is not the silver bullet and faces policy problems as well.10,11 Some players that are vulnerable to global climate change may not be able to afford to invest in adaptation.12 Although we recognize the problems with foreign aid for environmental protection,13 as with mitigation, this sort of a fiscal mismatch can be handled by appropriate subsidies and other types of redistributive policies. At the international level, the Global Environmental Facility, a partnership of 183 countries working with civil society, non-governmental organiza-tions (NGOs) and the private sector to address environmental issues, is making adaptation funds available to developing countries. At the national level, modest assistance is available from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency.

We are not arguing for abandoning mitigation-based strategies. We are highlighting the logic of political opposition to mitigation and suggest rebalancing the short-term efforts towards adaptation. This is politically wise and practical. It is also urgent, given the severe drought in many regions of the US, rising sea levels, changing rainfall patterns, and declin-ing snow packs. Investments in a variety of adaptation-related infrastruc-ture projects, such as water storage, need to be made urgently. Utilities need to upgrade generation and transmission to meet the peak summer demand. Governments—be it city,


Perspectives

county, state, or federal—will need to reconsider how to help economically underprivileged citizens who do not have private resources to individually adapt to these challenges.

By creating local benefits, adapta-tion creates local constituencies that favor investments in climate change policies. Not only does adaptation deprive politicians of the “China excuse,” it creates new political coali-tions to promote pro-environmental policies. As adaptation gathers steam, various groups will begin to recognize the costs of ignoring global climate change.14 In the long term, instead of crowding out mitigation, adaptation may create the political support for aggressive mitigation policies.

Roam and shoot A drought sign outside of the California Capital building in May 2015. In response to significant droughts, California has employed certain adaptation techniques, such as water levies.

References1. European Commission. Adaptation to climate

change. [online] (2015) http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/adaptation/index_en.htm.

2. Lobell, DB et al. Prioritizing climate change adaptation needs for food security in 2030. Science 319, 607–610 (2008).

3. Ford, J.D., L. Berrang-Ford, and J. Paterson. A systematic review of observed climate change adaptation in developed nations. Climatic Change 106, 327–336 (2011).

4. Dolšak, N. Climate change policy implementation: a cross-sectional analysis. Review of Policy Research 26, 551–570 (2009).

5. Lowi, T. American business, public policy, case studies, and political theory. World Politics 16, 677–715 (1964).

6. Wilson, J, ed. The Politics of Regulation (Basic Books, New York, 1980).

7. Olson, M. The Logic of Collective Action (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1965).

8. Ostrom, V., C. Tiebout, and R. Warren. The organization of government in metropolitan areas:

A theoretical Inquiry. American Political Science Review 55, 831–842 (1961).

9. Ostrom, E. Governing the Commons (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1990).

10. Few, R., K. Brown, and E.L. Tompkins. Public participation and climate change adaptation: avoiding the illusion of inclusion. Climate Policy 7, 46–59 (2007).

11. Adger, W.N.,et al. Are there social limits to adaptation to climate change? Climatic Change 93: 335–354 (2009).

12. Thomas, D.S.G. and C. Twyman. Equity and justice in climate change adaptation amongst natural-resource-dependent societies. Global Environmental Change 15, 115–124 (2005).

13. Lim, S., V. Menaldo, and A. Prakash. Foreign aid, economic globalization, and pollution. Policy Sciences 48, 181–205 (2015).

14. Carrico, A.R. et al. Does learning about climate change adaptation change support for mitigation? Journal of Environmental Psychology 41, 19–29 (2015).


Perspectives

On July 2, 2015, the United Nations Human Rights Council

adopted the first substantive child marriage-focused resolution calling for a strengthening of efforts to prevent and eliminate child, early, and forced marriages.1 With 15 million girls worldwide pushed into early mar-riages every year, the statement comes at a critical time. The alarming sta-tistics highlight the dramatic lack of reform or progress so far. Fortunately, afflicted countries are finally heeding the UN’s call to take action against early marriages.

Take Azerbaijan, where early mar-riage is a prevailing issue, a project has materialized to make major efforts against the increasing trend. The project analyzed several regions in the Eurasian country, confirming the prevalence of early marriages, and

is now working to propose several reform recommendations to the State Department. In 2013, 5000 girls in Azerbaijan were victims of early marriages, an increase from 4000 in 2012. A UNICEF study confirmed that early marriage “not only takes place, but is increasing in some of the regions of Azerbaijan.”2 Although it is evident that early marriages are on the rise, the primary cause of this trend is not clear. Early marriages often go undocumented as a consequence of unregulated religious ceremonies that are used to officiate the marriages. The practice of early marriage is attributed to a culture that believes that women are predestined to be wed and that marriage can serve as a means to preserve female honor. Economic instability or financial security can also play a role.

Azerbaijan is the most southerly nation of the Caucasus region, located east of Turkey and north of Iran. Although classified as a secular state, 95 percent of the Azerbaijani popula-tion identify as Muslim. The current ruling party, the New Azerbaijan Party, which has been in power since the nation’s independence from the Soviet Union in 1992, has been accused of rampant political corruption.3 A cor-rupt government makes certain laws difficult to monitor, and although there is legislation in place to regulate early marriages, it is rarely enforced. According to the Azerbaijani criminal code, forcing a girl into marriage is punishable by a 3000 to 4000 manat fine (approximately USD$2800–$3800) or up to four years imprisonment. However, the increase in early marriages shows the laws aren’t working. The current Azerbaijani project seeks to take on a different legislative approach in combating early marriages, looking at education as the primary approach to prevent early marriages instead of punitive retribution. The education-centric proposals aim to increase the number of television and radio programs to combat early marriage and to develop a Council of Women. In partnership with UNESCO and the European Union, training courses were carried out to learn how to use the media to counter gender stereotypes and to effectively reduce the rate of early and forced marriages. Since 2010, the Ministry of Education has been providing trainings and informational materials related to early marriage and reproductive rights to teachers and students.

Across the globe, in Uganda, legislation alone has also proven ineffective. A new government strat-egy has recently adopted a similar approach to that being employed in Azerbaijan. After seeing minimal

Countries Start Taking Action against Early Marriagesby Solange Azor

Peter PZ An Azerbaijani wedding in Baku. In regions of Azerbaijan, early and forced marriages are on the rise.


Perspectives

progress in the last 30 years, the government has decided more action needs to be taken. Forty percent of Ugandan girls are married before age 18, a rate three percent higher than the average in Eastern and Southern Africa, according to a 2014 UNICEF report. Moreover, 67 percent of women aged 24 to 29 with no educa-tion, and 58 percent of the same age group with primary education were found to have been married by age 18, as compared to only 14 percent of women with secondary education or higher. A report by the Forum for African Women Educationalists

(FAWE) published in July cited gender discrimination, traditional practices, and weak laws as the major causes of child marriage in the country.4 Consequently, the new governmental strategy aims to reinvigorate the stagnated progress and reduce the number of early marriages.5

The movement, the first of its kind in the African country, aims to address the issues brought up in the FAWE report. Like the Azerbaijani project, the strategy will focus on issues such as girls’ education, with an additional focus on rehabilitating children, implementing programs that

increase girls’ educational attendance, as well as offering programs that combat the traditional thinking and cultural mores that perpetuates early marriages.

The child marriage prevention organization Girls not Brides’ theory of change affirms that “education is one of the most powerful tools to delay the age at which girls marry as school attendance helps shift norms around child marriage.”6 Education and a sup-portive female community offer girls a strong sense of self and independence that better allows them to fight early marriages.

Vladimir Varfolomeev An Azerbaijani bride celebrates her wedding in Baku, Azerbaijan.


Perspectives

References1. Girls not Brides. Human Rights Council adopts

resolution to end child, early and forced marriage [online] (2015) http://www.girlsnotbrides.org/human-rights-council-adopts-resolution-to-end-child-early-and-forced-marriage/.

2. UNICEF. Study on early marriages in Azerbaijan [online] (2015) http://www.unicef.org/azerbaijan/Brochure_Eng.pdf.

3. Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project. Report: Corruption choking 5 Eastern European countries [online] (2015) https://www.occrp.org/en/daily/4126-report-corruption-choking-5-eastern-european-countries.

4. Karungi, Z and V. Matela. Uganda: north, west top early marriages. All Africa [online] (2015) http://allafrica.com/stories/201507030478.html.

5. Uganda launches strategy to end child marriage, teenage pregnancy. Global Times [online] (2015) http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/927734.shtml.

6. Girls not Brides. Theory of Change [online] (2015) http://www.girlsnotbrides.org/child-marriage-theory-of-change/.

The Commonwealth A new government initiative in Uganda is addressing early marriages in part by focusing on girls’ education, with programs aimed at increasing attendance and generating educational materials.


Perspectives

Since the dawn of the Internet, digital storytelling and new

media have been integral parts of the feminist movement. From the creation of feministing.org to Crunk Feminist Collective to large-scale Twitter pro-tests, third-wave feminism is based as much in online communities as it is in on-the-ground activist work. Nowhere has this been more poignant than with the sharing of experiences of sexual assault and harassment, exposing sto-ries such as Emma Sulkowicz’s ‘Carry That Weight’ and Angie Epifano’s ‘An Account of Sexual Assault at Amherst College,’ as well as a variety of stories from universities and students across the nation.1,2

With the emergence of the smartphone globally, many in the contemporary feminist movement have flocked to the new medium, set-ting up a preponderance of new story sharing and safety apps, the most high profile of which is Hollaback!. When Gloria Steinem, a trailblazing feminist leader in the 1960’s and 1970’s, was asked which current feminist leaders she admired and felt were bringing the movement forward, she responded, “Emily May of Hollaback!, who has empowered women in the street, literally.”3 Hollaback! is a movement-building social enterprise working in 92 cities, 32 countries, and 18 different languages, which seeks, through its app and online blog, to create a space in which women and the LGBTQ community can share and address their experiences with sexual assault, creating accountability and fostering support.4,5

Sexual harassment creates fear and insecurity in public spaces, as well as self-blame and victim shaming from

society at large. According to a US national survey, 65 percent of women reported experiencing at least one type of street harassment in their lifetimes.6 While the most pervasive form was a verbal assault, the survey states, “41%

of all women [surveyed] had experi-enced physically aggressive forms, including sexual touching (23%), following (20%), flashing (14%), and being forced to do something sexual (9%).”7 Hollaback! believes

The Quest for Social Change in Digital Storytelling: An Evaluation of Hollaback!by Katherine Dumais

Emily May Hollaback! encourages victims of street harassment to share their stories, joining a community geared towards empowering individuals.


Perspectives

that we can create a world where no one feels targeted on the street due to their gender or sexual expression. They work to change the framework from victim shaming to exposing a pervasive societal problem, striving to create accountability and grassroots advocacy to change public opinion.8 Hollaback! is a global nonprofit that uses an innovative franchising and fundraising model to create localized solutions across the world, which can then be expanded to create on-the-ground impact and cultural changes in communities globally.

Deciding to Hollaback! at HarassersThe founder of Hollaback!, Emily May, moved to New York City to study at New York University, where she was confronted with a sea of street harassment.9 Sometimes harassed two to three times a day on the street, she moved through the city with fear, and berated herself about what she was doing wrong, trying not to dwell on the harassers’ words in order to avoid giving them power.10 She began to question how we could make women feel safe and create accountability, when a woman named Thao Nguyen took a picture of a man who was pleasuring himself across from her on a subway. After being told by the police that they could do nothing, Nguyen posted the photo on Flickr, a popular social media platform, and shared her story. Nguyen’s action led many other women to come forward with similar experiences.11 The man was eventually arrested based on their collective claims.12 This was the spark that Emily needed to create Hollaback!. Here was a way women could hold harassers accountable: through online narratives. In 2005, with a group of six friends, she started a blog to collect stories of different types of harassment experienced by

women and members of LGBTQ com-munities.13 As Hollaback! grew into an online movement, a 2010 Kickstarter campaign provided the funds needed to create a mobile phone app.14 The new nonprofit organization immedi-ately began to spread their model to other cities across the United States and around the world.

How Hollaback! WorksHollaback! is now a registered nonprofit based in Brooklyn, New York with a globally functional app and a franchise model that spans the world. IHollaback.org aggregates data submitted online, as well as on the app. Through the app, any person around the world can post an experi-ence or observation. Harassment is then broken down into different types, including verbal, stalking, homopho-bic, transphobic, assault, groping, and racist.15 Users select the applicable type and then submit their story and photos. Others can then click ‘I got your back’ in support, or comment on the experience.16 Through the power of posting, Hollaback! emphasizes that the storyteller will feel less alone, bringing awareness, validation, healing, and courage.17 Women feel more confident on the street and in discussing their experiences with others in their lives, with the end goal of creating research, awareness, and empowerment.

While the app aggregates data from around the world, the site is broken down into regional components based

on local chapters of the organization. The organization consists of only three full-time staff members, but has volunteer chapters in each of its 92 cities.18 Each chapter is run by a diverse set of young people hoping to combat what, for them, is a very personal issue. Hollaback! covers the USD $2,500 dollar cost to create a

website for each new location. After its foundation, each chapter is in charge of its own website, local programming, and fundraising, and also attends train-ing webinars, engages in a Facebook group, and meets with the global team monthly to discuss goals and values.19 This allows for culturally relevant programming around the world. At Hollaback! London, volunteers are working to create safer spaces for women in pubs through a campaign called Good Night Out.20 For Hollaback! Delhi, progress means protests against local rape cases. In Hollaback! Egypt, groups of women track harassment and go into crowded spaces to help women who are surrounded and harassed by men.21

Hollaback! is engaging local people to solve local problems and allowing individuals to provide their own service by posting their stories. It is a soapbox for women around the world, but also keeps costs low in creating strong research data, accountability systems, and culturally specific solu-tions. To date, Hollaback! has collected over 5,000 stories, created training materials, and instituted grassroots

Hollaback! believes that we can create a world where no one feels targeted on the street due to their gender or sexual expression.


Perspectives

programming around the world, all with an annual budget that reached USD $380,000 just this year.22

Taking Hollaback! One Step FurtherHollaback! provides an innovative way of empowering women against street harassment, but it could increase its impact by engaging more with bystanders and harassers, as well as

establishing clear impact metrics. There is no easy solution to street harassment, as, even in a public space, it drives a culture of fear, victim blam-ing, and isolation. Hollaback! creates a community among those victimized, creating a space for empowerment instead of fear. This innovation, coupled with local advocacy programs, begins to strike out the stigma sur-rounding street harassment, but has

minimal on-the-ground accountability. At best, those who share their story are able to snap a photo. Otherwise, when they write about their harasser, they generally have no identifying informa-tion. The situation is not addressed on the spot.

Further action could be taken. Similar to its existing work in Hollaback! Egypt, the organization could work to make its reporters

Emily May A university chapter of Hollaback! empowers college students to fight street harassment.


Perspectives

global advocates for other women in their community, further shaming the harasser and empowering the victim on the spot. The organization has begun to engage with these ideas in their video blog entitled ‘With Love and Revolution,’ but more work could be done to promote bystander intervention.

While Hollaback! currently provides a great research tool on the rate of sexual assault in communities, the next step is measuring the posi-tive impact that the organization has had. Measuring how many women are harassed, while also working to engage the local community to better understand how the use of Hollaback! has changed a given area, would be a great first step in understanding not only who has been harassed, but also who hasn’t been harassed because of Hollaback!’s work.

Hollaback! represents a new kind of solution, one where crowdfunding, the franchising of a model into many local contexts, and new updates in technology can forge social change in communities globally. While Hollaback!’s theory of change could create further accountability, it proves that the creation of a community around a social problem empowers those dealing with the problem, foster-ing solidarity and a drive for change. A paradigm has shifted for the feminist, as well as other social movements: true power is not only in the people we produce at marches, but in the people and communities we can bring together online to create something greater.

References1. Carry that Weight [online] (2015) http://www.

carryingtheweighttogether.com/.2. Epifano, A. An Account of Sexual Assault

at Amherst College. The Amherst Student [online] (2012) http://amherststudent.amherst.edu/?q=article/2012/10/17/account-sexual-assault-amherst-college.

3. Staff and Board. Hollaback! [online] (2015) http://www.ihollaback.org/about/staff-and-board/.

4. Hollaback! [online] (2015) http://www.ihollaback.org/.

5. May, E. TEDCity2.0: Emily May. YouTube. [online] (2014) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMrPQCG2akA.

6. Stop Street Harassment. Unsafe and Harassed in Public Spaces: A National Street Harassment Report. [online] (2014) http://www.stopstreetharassment.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2014-National-SSH-Street-Harassment-Report.pdf.

7. Stop Street Harassment. Unsafe and Harassed in Public Spaces: A National Street Harassment Report. [online] (2014) http://www.stopstreetharassment.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2014-National-SSH-Street-Harassment-Report.pdf.

8. About. Hollaback! [online] (2015) http://www.ihollaback.org/about/.

9. Sharkey, J. A Worldwide Fight against Street Harassment. The New York Times [online] (2013) http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/22/business/fighting-harassment-of-women-on-streets-worldwide.html?_r=0.

10. May, E. TEDCity2.0: Emily May. YouTube. [online] (2014) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMrPQCG2akA.

11. Fellow Profile: Emily May. Ashoka USA [online] (2014) http://usa.ashoka.org/fellow/emily-may.

12. Chung, J. Suspected Subway Pleasurer Arrested. Gothamist [online] (2005) http://gothamist.com/2005/09/01/suspected_subway_pleasurer_arrested.php.

13. History and Values. Hollaback! [online] (2015) http://www.ihollaback.org/about/history/.

14. May, E. Hollaback! Kickstarter [online] (2010) https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/hollaback/hollaback.

15. Hollaback App. Hollaback! Apple Store (2013).16. Anonymous. What Makes Him Think He Can Say

That To 2 Fifteen Year Olds?! Hollaback! [online] (2014) http://nyc.ihollaback.org/2014/07/11/anonymous-story-what-makes-him-think-he-can-say-that-to-2-fifteen-year-olds/.

17. Hollaback App. Hollaback! Apple Store (2013).18. Donate. Hollaback! [online] (2015) http://www.

ihollaback.org/why-donate/.19. Start a Hollaback in your community! Hollaback!

[online] (2015) http://www.ihollaback.org/about/the-movement/.

20. Good Night Out. Hollaback! London [online] (2015) http://www.goodnightoutcampaign.org/.

21. State of the Streets 2013. Hollaback! [online] (2013) http://www.ihollaback.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/sots13-v2.pdf.

22. Donate. Hollaback! [online] (2015) http://www.ihollaback.org/why-donate/.

Emily May Hollaback! volunteers raise awareness around street harassment, while the app generates data with the goal of compiling meaningful data.


Perspectives

Joelle Hatem Protesters in Beirut march against harassment in Beirut, Lebanon in 2012. Hollaback! uses local chapters to address site specific concerns and issues globally.


Feature

by Mary Evelyn Tucker and John Grim

Integrating Ecology and Justice: The New Papal Encyclical

In BriefIn June of 2015, Pope Francis released the first encyclical on ecology. The Pope’s message highlights “integral ecology,” intrinsically linking ecological integrity and social justice. While the encyclical notes the statements of prior Popes and Bishops on the environment, Pope Francis has departed from earlier biblical language describing the domination of nature. Instead, he expresses a broader understanding of the beauty and complexity of nature, on which humans fundamentally depend. With “integral ecology” he underscores this connection of humans to the natural environment. This perspective shifts the climate debate to one of a human change of consciousness and conscience. As such, the encyclical has the potential to bring about a tipping point in the global community regarding the climate debate, not merely among Christians, but to all those attending to this moral call to action.

Mat McDermott Una Terra Una Famiglia Humana, One Earth One Family climate march in Vatican City in June 2015.


On June 18, 2015 Pope Francis released Laudato Si, the first encyclical in the history of

the Catholic Church on ecology. An encyclical is the highest-level teaching document in Catholicism. There have been earlier statements by popes and bishops on environmental issues, but never an encyclical.

With 1.2 billion Catholics on the planet, the potential for attention to environmental and climate change issues is unprecedented. Even if, as some argue, encyclicals do not draw the response and obligation from Catholics as in the past, it is clear that this one will be discussed in religious and educational circles radiating out into the larger Christian world and beyond. Indeed, the media coverage of this docu-ment has already been robust. Scientists and ecologists have been keen to draw on its message for conservation as UN climate change negotiations in Paris approach in December 2015. What dis-tinguishes the Pope’s intervention is his linking of environmental concerns with issues of social justice and economic inequality—themes often lacking from the climate change discussions. This article suggests that the Pope’s message has the potential to transform that debate by connecting environmental-ism with a century of Catholic social justice teachings. Ecology and social justice are inextricably linked, says the Pope. That’s a Christian message but also a profoundly human one

Pope Francis could not have chosen a more central topic than the human role in ecological degradation and climate change. He critiques our “tech-nocratic paradigm” and “throwaway culture.” He calls for a transformation of our market-based economic system that he feels is destroying the planet and creating immense social inequi-ties. Indeed, the encyclical is highly critical of unfettered capitalism and rampant consumerism.

This might seem like a radical message—but it’s also the culmination of a century of Catholic social justice

thinking. By drawing on and develop-ing the work of earlier theologians and ethicists, this encyclical makes explicit the links between social justice and eco-justice.1

One of the key architects of the encyclical, Cardinal Peter Kodwo Appiah Turkson, believes Pope Francis’ phrase “integral ecology” is central to under-standing this interrelationship. Cardinal Turkson has identified several principles behind the phrase: 1) the moral impera-tive of all peoples to be protectors of the environment; 2) care for creation as a virtue in its own right; and 3) the need

for a new global solidarity to direct our search for the common good.2

Integral ecology means that ecological integrity and social justice are linked because humans and nature are part of nurturing, interdependent life systems. Given that the poor and vulnerable are most adversely affected by an ailing planetary system, the two must be addressed together. While this draws on traditional Christian teach-ings regarding the poor, it also marks an important shift in the church’s con-ception of the relationship of humans to nature and humans to work.

We can compare Pope Francis’ thinking to the writing of Pope John Paul II, who himself builds on Pope Leo XIII’s progressive encyclical Rerum Novarum on workers’ rights in 1891. A hundred years after Leo, John Paul II writes:

The original source of all that is good is the very act of God, who created both the earth and man, and who gave the earth to man so that he might have dominion over it by his work and enjoy its fruits (Gen 1:28)…It is through work that man, using his intelligence and exercising his freedom, succeeds in domi-nating the earth and making it a fitting home…Obviously, he also has the responsibility not to hinder others from having their own part of God’s gift; indeed, he must cooperate with others so that together all can dominate the earth. (Centesimus annus: 31)

Drawing heavily on biblical language of domination, John Paul underscores the modern separation of humans from nature. However, he also emphasizes the dignity of cooperative human labor as making something productive of God’s gift of nature. Thus, the more traditional perspective of “dominion” in Genesis is balanced by a call for “stewardship” of nature. This stands in marked contrast to his successors’ more holistic view of nature.

Pope Benedict expanded Catholic thinking regarding the environment. His 2009 encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, is focused on charity and our duty to the poor as well as to present and future generations. He wrote of this responsibility arising from:

…our relationship to the natural environment. The environ-ment is God’s gift to everyone, and in our use of it we have a

Key Concepts

• “Integral ecology” brings together nature and humans.

• Eco-justice encompasses the vulner-ability of people and the planet.

• Inequities and environmental degradation being caused by market capitalism need to be addressed.

• These moral principles are part of Catholic social justice teachings of earlier Popes.

• A cosmological perspective or interrelatedness is also part of the encyclical.

• The encyclical calls for” ecological conversion.”


responsibility towards the poor, towards future generations and towards humanity as a whole. When nature, including the human being, is viewed as the result of mere chance or evolutionary determinism, our sense of responsibility wanes. In nature, the believer recognizes the wonderful result of God’s creative activity, which we may use responsibly to satisfy our legitimate needs, material or otherwise, while respecting the intrinsic balance of creation. (Caritas in Veritate: 48)

Pope Benedict moves away from language of domination of nature toward the protection of nature. Yet, he holds to a view of creation as in balance, which differs from the more

dynamic perspectives of contemporary ecological science. Pope Benedict also presents what he calls the “grammar of nature” saying:

…the natural environment is more than raw material to be manipulated at our pleasure; it is a wondrous work of the Creator containing a ‘gram-mar,’ which sets forth ends and criteria for its wise use, not its reckless exploitation. Today much harm is done to development precisely as a result of these distorted notions. Reducing nature merely to a col-lection of contingent data ends up doing violence to the envi-ronment and even encouraging activity that fails to respect human nature itself.

He goes on to write that global development:

…cannot ignore coming genera-tions, but needs to be marked by solidarity and inter-generational justice, while taking into account a variety of contexts: ecological, juridical, economic, political and cultural. (Caritas in Veritate: 48)

There is a clear shift here from Pope John Paul. Yet Pope Benedict still relies on an anthropocentric ethic of “wise use” of nature. Perhaps he was wary that talking about nature’s inherent goodness might open him to the charge of neopaganism from conserva-tive factions within the church.

Pope Francis doesn’t seem to have such reservations. Indeed, following

Jeffrey Bruno / Aleteia Pope Francis appears outside of the Vatican at an event in April 2014.


Francis of Assisi, he invokes “Mother Earth” in the opening paragraph of the encyclical. Pope Francis also shifts the church to a view of nature in line with environmental science and environ-mental philosophy. He calls for great ecological literacy and understanding of environmental problems. He has

left the earlier biblical language of domination for an understanding of integral ecology that connects humans to their environment and to the whole evolutionary process.

Indeed, in this respect there are echoes in the encyclical of the influ-ence of two progressive Catholic

thinkers of the 20th century, namely, the scientist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881–1955) and the cultural historian Thomas Berry (1914–2009). Both of these thinkers saw the “grammar of nature” as reflecting an evolutionary unfolding of Earth’s ecosystems.

Teilhard de Chardin was a Jesuit priest and paleontologist whose thinking about the place of humans in evolution led to his exile from Europe to China in the late 1920s. Of particu-lar import is Teilhard’s understanding of evolution that he saw being driven by life’s “zest.” Teilhard wrote: “A zest for living…would appear to be the fun-damental driving force which impels and directs the universe along its main axis of complexity-consciousness…”3

Pope Francis has drawn on the same notion to describe a dynamic eco-logical relationship of humans with Earth’s evolution. There are echoes also of cultural historian, Thomas Berry, who situated the human as aris-ing from, and dependent on, this long evolutionary journey. Berry writes:

At such a moment, a new revo-lutionary experience is needed, an experience wherein human consciousness awakens to the grandeur and sacred quality of Earth’s process. This awakening is our human participation in the dream of Earth...4

From this cosmological perspective Berry calls on humans to participate in the Great Work of transformation–building new ecological economics, new educational and political systems, and new religious and spiritual com-munities that are aligned with Earth’s capacities and limits.

It is this evolutionary understand-ing of Earth’s systems, so central to Teilhard and Berry, that provides a larger context for the Pope’s own revolutionary thinking. Indeed, this is also the perspective of Journey of the Universe, which narrates the epic story of evolution in film and book form

Mat McDermott A participant in the climate change march at Vatican City in June 2015 holds a placard depicting the modern Pope Francis and the Canticle of the Creatures.


and shows the implications of this story for environmental living in the Conversations.5,6

Without this integrated sense of mutually enhancing human—Earth relations in an evolving universe, climate discussions can become simply business as usual amidst policy proposals, market-based schemes, and technological fixes. This integrated perspective for humans of a change of consciousness and conscience promises to have a rippling effect on the contemporary climate debate. In

this spirit, the encyclical calls on gov-ernments and individuals to engage in action for climate justice.

The hope is the Pope’s intervention can provide a tipping point for the global community—not just among Christians but among other religious groups as well. There are more than a billion Muslims, a billion Hindus, a billion Confucians, and nearly 500 million Buddhists, many of whom are hearing this call to action. The encyclical will also be a source of encouragement to environmentalists

who are not overtly religious but who care deeply about the environment, often for aesthetic and spiritual reasons.

The Pope convened religious lead-ers, scientists, and economists from all over the world at the Vatican on April 28, 2015 to highlight the moral dimen-sions of our global environmental crisis. He urged these leaders to join him in speaking out on the human suffering climate change is causing, especially for the most vulnerable. In a similar spirit, he commissioned

Thierry Ehrmann A painted street portrait of Pierre Theilhard de Chardin in France. Teilhard de Chardin was a Jesuit priest whose revolutionary thinking on the relationship between humans and the Earth’s evolution led to his exile from Europe in the late 1920s.


Cardinal Turkson to convene a gather-ing at the United Nations on June 30, 2015 to call for concerted ecological and social change. The Pope has also addressed politicians and business leaders at Davos, noting that the wealthier countries have responsibili-ties to the poor in terms of fair and healthy development. In September, he will address the UN General Assembly and the US Congress to highlight the urgent need for climate change action.

Thus the publication of the papal encyclical is a unique opportunity to scale up and move forward. That is

because it provides a renewed moral force and shared ethical commitment regarding environmental issues, espe-cially climate change.7 It also highlights that we have a special kinship with nature and are responsible for its con-tinuity for future generations. Indeed, the flourishing of the Earth community may depend on how humans heed this moral call to what Francis calls “ecological conversion.”

References1. Tucker, M.E., J.A. Grim, L. Boff, and S. McDonough.

Ecology and Justice Series. Orbis Books [online] (2015) http://www.orbisbooks.com/category-202/.

2. Gronski, B. Cardinal Turkson sheds light on Pope Francis’ environmental encyclical. Catholic Rural Life [online] (2015) https://catholicrurallife.org/cardinal-turkson-sheds-light-on-pope-franciss-environmental-encyclical/.

3. Teilhard de Chardin, P. Activation of Energy, translated by René Hague (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Inc, New York, 1970).

4. Berry, T. Reinventing the human at the species level in Appendix to The Christian Future and the Fate of Earth Tucker, M.E. and J. Grim eds. (Orbis Books, Maryknoll NY, 2009). 123.

5. Swimme, B.T. and M.E. Tucker. Journey of the Universe (Yale University Press, New Haven, 2011).

6. Journey of the Universe film (DVD). Journey Conversations [online] (2015) www.journeyoftheuniverse.org.

7. Forum on Religion and Ecology at Yale University. Yale University [online] (2015) www.fore.yale.edu.

Mat McDermott The hope is that Laudato Si will provide a tipping point for the international climate debate, appealing to all religions and humanities in its global moral call to action.


Feature

Water Conservation and the Water-Energy Nexus at Xavier University

by Nancy Bertaux, Ann Dougherty, John Hazlett, and Mark Miller

In BriefAs Pope Francis’ recent encyclical on the environment has reminded us, “access to safe drinkable water is a basic and univer-sal human right, since it is essential to human survival and, as such, is a condition for the exercise of other human rights.”1,2 Even in water-rich regions where water is “cheap,” careful attention to water conservation and pollution prevention is a moral necessity, helping us to respect this most essential resource while raising awareness of the lack of access to safe water around the globe. Xavier University in Cincinnati, Ohio is located in an area where water bills are relatively low, yet the area suffers from combined sewer overflow issues with associated water pollution. To tackle this problem, students developed a new model for assessing their water usage that, combined with energy savings, offers a bottom-up approach.

Elyce Feliz Xavier University in Cincinnati, Ohio.


The moral imperative of water sustainability is coming into focus, as witnessed by the work

of global water activists and underlined by the recent statement from Pope Francis, “access to safe drinkable water is a basic and universal human right, since it is essential to human survival and, as such, is a condition for the exercise of other human rights.”1,2 The need for water conserva-tion and the interconnections between water and energy (the “water-energy nexus”) are also gaining increased attention in the wake of a series of highly visible events, ranging from droughts (across a third of the United States, including long-term drought in California) to storms (impact of loss of power in Hurricane Sandy on water infrastructure). Increasingly, organizations will be seeking to ana-lyze and address issues related to the water-energy nexus. The Department of Energy (DOE) recently formed a special team to issue a major report on the water-energy nexus. Increasingly, organizations will be seeking to ana-lyze and address issues related to the water-energy nexus. As the DOE team states, “It is time for a more integrated approach to address the challenges and opportunities of the water-energy nexus.”3

Universities as institutions are often major users of both water and energy and also have a unique capacity to inform society and raise awareness; many are working hard to reduce their energy and water footprints, both to reduce their costs and to use their research expertise to provide examples for other institutions.4 Xavier University’s 2010 Campus Sustainability Plan included water sustainability as a key element in overall campus sustainability and led to a number of water conservation measures.5 Recently, Xavier’s experi-ence with their Energy Initiative led campus sustainability leaders to think about achieving similar results with water usage and to seek understanding of the water-energy nexus on campus.

How Energy Led to WaterIn academic year 2013–14, a sus-tainability speaker series theme of “Energy Justice” focused the university’s attention on energy and included visits from energy experts such as Rocky Mountain Institute’s Amory Lovins and economist Jeremy Rifkin.6 Green building policies and

practices that began in earnest in 2009 (construction of three buildings to LEED silver standards, including a central utility plant for heating and cooling systems) had reduced carbon intensity on campus but not the overall footprint. Inspired by Amory Lovins’ visit in the fall of 2013, a year-long Energy Initiative was funded by university President Father

Graham, S.J. at a cost of USD$120,000 and directed at uncovering immediate energy savings with a one-year pay-back, a challenging task on an already efficient campus. Energy consultant Ronald Perkins of Navasota, Texas (who had worked with Lovins in the past) helped Physical Plant staff and students identify problems and holis-tically analyze and solve them. This included workshops, walk throughs led by Perkins, and students who were appointed to be so-called “energy detectives” using an infrared camera and temperature/humidity pens to search for building leaks. As a result of these measures, Xavier achieved a five percent reduction of campus energy and met the one-year payback guideline from administration.

This successful experience with energy was extended to include a water study. While water bills are relatively low in the region, there is currently a significant combined sewer overflow (CSO) problem in the area (leading to raw sewage flowing into waterways in periods of high rain), resulting in higher sewer bills and indicating an urgent environmen-tal need for storm water management and water conservation.7 Water consultants assisted staff and sustain-ability interns as they collected data, developed a water footprint, and made project recommendations. As a follow-up to this analysis, Xavier students in a Natural Resource, Environmental, and Ecological Economics course custom-ized the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Pollution Prevention Calculator to more accurately estimate the embedded energy in water deliv-ered to Xavier’s campus.

A Collaborative ApproachThis project used a systems thinking approach, so university students worked together with faculty, campus operations staff, and com-munity partners in an integrated and experiential manner.9 This collaborative approach to tackling

Key Concepts

• Societies and organizations should analyze water and energy together. The “water-energy nexus” refers to the interconnections between water and energy, such as the energy cost of delivering water, the water cost of producing energy, and the entwined nature of energy and water infrastructures.

• The need for water conservation across the globe is increasingly recognized. All of us should treat water as a precious resource, including those who live in relatively water-rich areas.

• Xavier’s water-energy initiative benefited from the perspectives of a diverse group of individuals from multiple divisions and levels. Building a broad-based working group is critical to the success of innovative sustainability projects and can build system interconnections that improve sustainability efforts in the future.

• In areas such as the energy cost of water usage, customizing standard-ized metrics to reflect local costs allows us to more accurately calculate environmental impacts and therefore make better decisions on related practices and policies.


environmental and sustainability issues is a model that serves several valuable purposes simultaneously. Students in the Fall 2014 class had studied water as an economic resource and as a crucial element in local and global ecosystems via a general overview and abstract economic analysis.1,10,11 Studying water usage, storm water runoff, and nonpoint source water pollution issues right on their own campus, where they are personally using water by flushing toilets, using sinks and drinking fountains, and walking through landscaped grounds liter-ally brought the discussion home to students. Students thus gained valuable knowledge and skills by working on real-world problems in an experiential learning methodol-ogy, while partners gained from the fresh perspectives and contributions of students. Faculty gained in-depth knowledge of relevant cases that can be communicated to future classes as well as community contacts that can assist them in staying up-to-date on cutting-edge applications.12

Further, when campus operations and academic classes work together to improve the efficiency and envi-ronmental impact of their common campus, constructive relationships are formed and all parties achieve a better understanding of each other’s functions.13 From a systems thinking viewpoint, this introduced new interconnections to the system, which can serve as a basis for further improvements in the campus environ-ment in the future.9 As a result of the water study, Xavier’s Sustainability Committee is now planning to report to the campus community regularly on water sustainability progress, thus solidifying the campus collabora-tion around water. This expands the foundation for further collaboration on other aspects of sustainability, assisting the University to fulfill and strengthen its sustainability commitments.

Water Footprint StudyThe water study was undertaken in the summer of 2014. Water consul-tants Williams Creek Consulting worked with staff and sustainability interns to develop a baseline water footprint, that is, the total amount of potable water used and storm water runoff generated on the entire campus. The footprint was used as a basis for project recommendations, with the goal of moving Xavier’s campus closer to its long-term goal of Net Zero Water (where water use is minimized and offset by storm water infiltration, using best management practices in green infrastructure). Consultants, staff, and student interns did walk-through assessments of water use and storm-water management practices throughout campus, supplemented by desktop data analysis by consultants. Initial project recommendations were discussed in lively, open-ended work-shops with faculty and staff and later refined by input from staff, faculty, students, and administration.

The study documented the fact that more rainwater falls on the campus than is required to meet all of our current water usage. This generated a powerful learning moment for Xavier students, faculty, and administrators as they reflected on these facts: the campus receives all the water it needs from the sky, but instead, this rainwater drains away, contributing to the serious storm water runoff and combined sewer overflow issues in the region, while the campus then has to purchase all their water needs. Specifically, data from the water footprint study estimated Xavier’s cur-rent annual water use at 79.3 million gallons, with the majority associated with heating and cooling buildings (showing the importance of the water-energy nexus, since we normally focus on the energy aspects of heating and cooling). Additionally, 52 percent of Xavier’s 142-acre campus consists of impervious surfaces in the form of rooftops, parking lots, roads, and

walkways. Based on the EPA’s Storm Water Management Model (SWMM), these impervious surfaces generate 85 million gallons of storm water runoff annually, greater than the usage of 79.3 million gallons. This implies a water surplus if all storm water could be captured, treated, and utilized. Since nonpotable water (water not suitable for drinking) can be used for irrigation for landscaping, the study indicated capturing rainwater for irri-gation as a first step. The runoff from

Sustainability at Xavier UniversityXavier’s 2010 Campus Sustainability Plan was developed after Xavier President Michael Graham, SJ joined more than 1,000 institutions in signing the American Colleges and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment,8 committing the University to carbon neutrality by 2030. To achieve this goal, a campus-wide Sustainability Committee was formed, a public sustainability speaker series was started, a Sustainability Director was hired, a number of Sustainability Faculty Fellows were funded, and by 2014, several interdisciplinary degrees in sustainability were launched to add to Xavier’s BS in Environmental Science: the BA in Economics, Sustainability and Society; BA in Land, Farming and Community; BSBA in Sustainability: Economics and Management; and MA in Urban Sustainability and Resilience.6 In 2015, a Sustainability Advisory Board for academic programs was formed, with prominent green leaders from private, public, and nonprofit sectors. The University has joined the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) and attends and presents at AASHE conferences. All efforts stress building commitment through involving a broad network of individuals on campus; working with community partners and sharing knowledge; and using campus as a laboratory for student learning and best practices.


Xavier’s 930,000 square feet of rooftops alone has an annual rainfall capture potential of over 19 million gallons and would require minimal treatment for sediment prior to use for irrigation.

Other water footprint reduction opportunities identified by Williams Creek and interns include the fol-lowing: rain gardens, xeriscaping (landscaping with little or no irriga-tion), air handler condensate reuse, replacement of domestic fixtures with EPA WaterSense® labeled products, and recommendations for operating pools and fountains with water conservation strategies in mind. For example, the Cintas Center, which holds events with over 10,000

attendees, has two cooling towers and nine air handler units. Air handler condensate represents a significant onsite water resource that is low in sediment, dissolved solids, hardness, and pathogens. Condensate is plentiful at the same time that cooling tower water demands are high, with an estimated 3 to ten gallons of conden-sate generated for every 1,000 square feet of conditioned space. To utilize this alternative water source, some plumbing alterations are required, and reused water may require disinfec-tion and removal of copper (from contact with the cooling coil). Lastly, opportunities for green infrastructure implementation at Xavier’s campus

were identified in landscaped areas where storm inlets could be raised to promote infiltration of storm water for shallow aquifer recharge, thus moving Xavier’s campus towards a Net Zero Water condition with associated carbon reductions.

Water-Energy Nexus Analysis by StudentsIn Fall 2014, over 40 Xavier under-graduate students took Professor Nancy Bertaux’s course in Natural Resource, Environmental and Ecological Economics. A subgroup of students, led by senior Mark Miller, undertook a class project to follow up on the water footprint study and

Xavier University ECOS students, led by Mark Hanlon of Xavier University’s Physical Plant, explore the campus’ water-related infrastructure, such as the cooling tower depicted above.


ultimately reported results to all students in the class, plus attendees from Xavier administration and the Cincinnati water community. Students also participated in the University’s sustainability theme of “Water Justice” for the 2014–15 academic year, gaining the bigger picture on water resource issues by attending the speaker series and smaller dialogue sessions with P&G Vice President for Global Sustainability Len Sauers, water journalist Cynthia Barnett, and water activist Maude Barlow.6

Students explored the water-energy nexus on their own campus by researching embedded energy

in the water delivered to Xavier’s campus. EPA’s Pollution Prevention Calculator’s water conservation tool was utilized to estimate the green-house gas impact of Xavier’s water usage.11 The calculator tool was then customized by incorporation of more granular data pertaining to Xavier’s campus. Working with expert guid-ance from John Hazlett of Williams Creek Consulting, and in partnership with Xavier University’s Physical Plant and Sustainability Director Ann Dougherty, students gathered data from local utilities serving the Xavier campus, customized the calculator, and compared results obtained by

using the EPA’s Pollution Prevention Calculator versus results from the customized calculator (described in the Appendix).14

Students learned that water foot-printing is a rapidly developing field in need of (and approaching) standard-ized measurement and improved data collection. The water conservation tool contained in the standard EPA calculator includes parameters based on averages, reflecting the principle of diminishing feasibility (for every step of complexity in data collection, the data becomes disproportionately more complex to attain). For a single institu-tion such as Xavier, modifications to

Xavier University Mark Hanlon, Associate Director of Maintenance and Operations at the University’s physical plant, explains the control panel of one of the Univeristy’s largest chillers to a student.


the data collection tool can add accu-racy without adding much complexity, given the institution’s easy access to its own data (e.g., organizational data-bases and water bills). The Appendix outlines the specific procedures for customizing the EPA calculator’s water tool, which will allow other institu-tions to more accurately calculate the carbon impact of their water-energy nexus. Note that the EPA’s calcula-tor converts data relevant to water conservation into greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions equivalents. It takes into account pumping, treatment, and distribution but not heating. There are three main parameters in the calculator: water conserved, conver-sion factor, and set energy expenditure per million gallons pumped, treated, and distributed. These are described in the Appendix, including procedures to customize the calculator where applicable, and calculations performed for Xavier University are presented. Accounting for all adjustments, Xavier University’s emissions footprint was 37 percent lower than the estimate from the standard EPA calculator (23 percent coming from the conversion factor alone).

By customizing the calculator, institutions benefit from more accurate estimates. For example, if the institution is located closer to their water source than suggested by the generalized model, as was Xavier, they will enjoy a more accurate, lower water footprint, a welcome and nearly costless improvement in their green profile. Conversely, if local parameters are adverse compared to the general-ized calculator, the institution could find their energy use is being signifi-cantly underestimated, causing them to enhance their carbon footprint mitigation strategies. Either way, the higher quality information will be helpful to institutions committed to reductions in their GHG emissions.

While the water-energy nexus analysis allowed Xavier to report lower GHG emissions due to a more accurate

calculation, Xavier remains committed to pursuing water conservation with its associated energy conservation. Water is an abundant resource in the Cincinnati area, averaging 42 inches of rainfall annually, but as noted above, the region is challenged by serious storm water runoff and combined sewer overflow problems.7 Xavier also wants students to be aware that around the world and in parts of the US, water shortages are serious and chronic, with significant pricing and access problems that relate to issues of just distribution, as we teach our students to be “Men and Women For and With Others.”1,2,10

Future Ideas on the Water-Energy Nexus: Use Local GeographyThe water study showed the benefits of Xavier’s previous water conserva-tion efforts that included careful, drip irrigation and automatic moisture monitoring methods, installation of low-flow toilets and aerated sink faucets and showerheads in all new and renovated buildings, and tanks for slow discharge of storm water. The water study has spurred action plans that will further increase water conservation and recharging of aquifers, while reducing storm water runoff. These include the reuse of condensation from HVAC systems and systematic increase in green infrastructure on campus, such as rain gardens and xeriscaping. With the water-energy nexus as inspiration, the University is now planning two further pilot projects that capitalize on

the physical geography of the campus and could expand water-energy knowl-edge and awareness in the community:

1. Work with a local mechanical engi-neering company to design a turbine to use the high volume of rainfall and steep hillsides on campus to create energy. Two campus locations have been identified that have large parking lots that are adjacent to hillsides and drops of 20 feet or more, with minimum slope of 75 percent. In addition, rainfall to roofs on newer buildings flows to underground tanks for slow, gravity discharge to the region’s combined

sewer system. Engineering and physics students will work with pro-fessors, the campus chief plumber, and mechanical engineers to imple-ment their best design, exploring the following:

• Can in-pipe or in-tank turbines take advantage of this flow during high rainfall events?

• At what resistance would the turbine be set to not block but rather slow flow under different incoming flow rates?

• What topographical “drops” and pipe geometries are necessary for such technologies to be used effectively?

2. Recycle rainwater on campus through use of rainwater barrels and solar panels for pumps. Locations with buildings that have downspouts in the right

Students thus gained valuable knowledge and skills by working on real-world problems in an experiential learning methodology, while partners gained from the fresh perspectives and contributions of students.


areas to connect to a rainwater barrel have been identified in three areas, and estimated costs for a project with 10 barrels, solar panels, pumps, drip irrigation, and engineering are USD $50,000. Rainwater from barrels would irrigate lawns around these areas, and solar panels for the pumps would conserve energy and reduce the campus carbon footprint. The barrels will need to be maintained over time—for example, emptying barrels prior to freezing temperatures in winter to avoid cracking. Total annual water yield, based on an estimated 20 gallons of harvested storm water per square foot of rooftop, would be 786,000 gallons for the three rooftops combined. Professors from Environmental Science, Physics and Economics would involve students with this project, including measuring pH, turbid-ity, and other aspects of water in

the barrels; building a system to indicate water levels in the barrels; testing the most efficient way to move water from the barrels to the irrigation system; and tracking water, energy, and cost savings.

Putting the Water and Energy Conversations TogetherIncreasing attention is now being directed both at water sustainability, and at the connection or “nexus” between water and energy. A leading water journalist has observed:

The nation’s energy and water problems are remarkably similar. So are the solutions: focusing on the demand side rather than constantly growing the supply side will help save the nation’s water resources and billions of dollars. At the very least, we should put the water and energy conversations together.15

For Xavier, ‘putting the conversa-tions together’ meant analyzing energy and water usage holistically. Sustainability initiatives of all kinds will increasingly incorporate more attention to issues related to water, and Xavier University’s experience in progressing from an energy focus to a water-and-energy focus will and should be replicated in other institutions who want to be a positive force for change on water. When water justice advocate Maude Barlow was asked how change will happen on water sustainability, she answered, “It’s going to come from the bottom up,” and to the question of who will do this, she said, “go home and look in the mirror.”16

AcknowledgementsThanks to Xavier University President Michael Graham and Chief Financial Officer Maribeth Amyot for funding the Xavier Energy Initiative, including the water study. Thanks to students in the water-energy project group

AgriLife Today One method of water conservation now employed by Xavier University is xeriscaping, or landscaping with little or no irrigation, as pictured.


in the Fall 2014 Natural Resource, Environmental, and Ecological Economics class; Sustainability Interns, Summer 2014; and Energy Detectives, Spring 2015. Thanks to professionals Ron Perkins, Ted Blahnik, Don Reichman and Mark Hanlon, Chief Engineer David Lococo, Vice President of Operations Robert Sheeran, Provost Scott Chadwick, and to visiting speakers Amory Lovins, Jeremy Rifkin, Len Sauers, Cynthia Barnett, and Maude Barlow.

AppendixThere are three main parameters in the calculator: water conserved, conversion factor, and set energy expenditure per million gallons pumped, treated, and distributed.14 (Institutions are advised to monitor the conversion factor periodically, as these can vary significantly as energy providers change sources of energy, for example from coal vs. natural gas. 17)

1. Water Conservation. The institu-tional user’s monthly water bills provide all required data for this parameter.

2. Conversion Factor. The calculator includes an index of conversion factors collected by region. Users can contact their specific energy provider (in our case, Duke Energy) to determine the metric for a customized calculator. In our case, this metric proved to be critical. The regional default conversion factor in the standard calculator was 0.0008909, but our research for Xavier University yielded a value of 0.00068199388. This factor alone suggested a 23 percent decrease in estimated emissions compared to the standard calculator.

3. Set Energy Expenditure Factor. This is perhaps the most important parameter to customize. This value quantifies the kWh needed to pump, treat, and distribute a million gallons of water, and is set at 3,300 kWh per million gallons.

Since Xavier University is closely situated to the Miller water treat-ment plant on the Ohio River, this estimate was high. Data from our water provider, Greater Cincinnati Water Works, yielded a value of 2714.117 kWh per million gallons. For users seeking to make the same adjustments, the following two-step process can be followed:

a. Contact local water pumping/treatment/distribution facilities and request the gallons and kWh associated with each process. In the case of Cincinnati, this is a single, municipally managed unit, but some insti-tutions may need to contact several facilities, not necessarily municipally-owned.

b. Use data to calculate customized set energy expenditure per mil-lion gallons pumped, treated, and distributed, as follows:

The total energy expended per million gallons is:

kWhTotal | galTotal = kWhRaw | galRaw + kWhTreatment | galTreatment + kWhDistribution | galDistribution

For institutions that receive water through more than water distribution pipeline (even if the water comes from the same treatment plant), this will only affect the distribution term in the equation above, which should be calculated using a weighted average in order to give appropriate representation to pipelines with asymmetric contributions. In this case, the distribution term will appear as the following equation with an index of i = a...n :

(kWhiDistribution | gal i

Distribution )2 | (kWha

Distributed | gal aDistributed +...+

kWhnDistributed | gal n

Distributed )

Accounting for both the conversion factor adjustment and the adjustment to set energy expenditures, Xavier University’s emissions footprint was 37 percent lower than the estimate from the generalized EPA calculator (recall it was 23 percent lower due to the conversion factor alone).

References1. Barlow, M. Blue Future: Protecting Water for People and

the Planet Forever (New Press, New York, 2014).2. Pope Francis. Laudato si’. The Holy See [online]

(2015) http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html.

3. Department of Energy. The water-energy nexus: challenges and opportunities [online] (2014) http://energy.gov/downloads/water-energy-nexus-challenges-and-opportunities.

4. NC State Energy Management. Strategic energy and water annual report [online] (2014) http://sustainability.ncsu.edu/campus/energy-water/.

5. Xavier University Sustainability Committee. Campus sustainability plan [online] (2010) http://www.xavier.edu/green/The-Plan.cfm.

6. Xavier University. Academic programs [online] (2015) http://www.xavier.edu/green/Academic.cfm.

7. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA approves plan to control sewer overflows in Cincinnati area [online] (2010) http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/12e8a727953bad4f85257b7f00548201!OpenDocument.

8. American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) [online] http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/about/mission-history.

9. Meadows, D. Thinking in Systems (Chelsea Green, White River VT, 2008).

10. Daly, H & Farley, J. Ecological Economics 2nd edn (Washington DC, Island Press, 2010).

11. Tietenberg, T & Lewis, L. Environmental Economics and Policy 6th edn (New York, Prentice Hall, 2009).

12. Wurdinger, S & Carlson, J. Teaching for Experiential Learning: Five Approaches that Work (Lanham MD, R&L Education, 2009).

13. Dougherty, A, Sheeran, R & Bertaux, N. Sustainability integrated with buildings and books: who does what? Presentation to the Society of College and University Planning (SCUP) (Pittsburgh, July 16, 2014).

14. Environmental Protection Agency. Pollution prevention program [online] (2014) http://www.epa.gov/p2/pubs/resources/measurement.html.

15. Barnett, C. Blue Revolution: Unmaking America’s Water Crisis 79 (Boston, Beacon Press, 2011).

16. Maude Barlow interview. The Progressive [online] (2008) http://www.progressive.org/mag/intv1208.html.

17. Duke Energy. Lighting the Way (n.p., 2013).


Julie Sweeney The water study revealed that more rainwater falls on campus than is needed to meet all of the university’s water usage needs. Future projects such will aim to capture and recycle that rainwater to make Xavier University more sustainable.


Feature

Firewood burning is the second most significant cause of deforestation worldwide,

behind only livestock production.1 Loss of biodiversity, habitat niches, and carbon stocks caused by deforesta-tion are all major global concerns. The emissions from incomplete combus-tion of firewood also present a major source of atmospheric pollution and global warming.2,3 In particular, when deposited on the ice in the Arctic through wind currents in the northern hemisphere, soot or black carbon from firewood burning absorbs solar energy, whereas the original ice would have reflected it. This affects the “albedo,” or the fraction of solar energy reflected from the Earth back into space, con-tributing to accelerated warming and further ice loss.4 Firewood smoke has also become a potent human health hazard, contributing to a loss of as many as eight years in lifespan for the women who cook with firewood due to the constant inhalation of particu-late matter as well as carcinogens such as benzopyrene.5,6

Much effort has been expended to mitigate the effects of firewood use among the three billion people in the Global South who still rely on biomass for their energy needs (mostly for

cooking), but almost all of these efforts have been largely unsuccessful. The Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves (GACC) has an ambitious plan to deploy 100 million High Efficiency Cookstoves (HECs) by the year 2020,7 but the plan has not yet been put into action due to technological and imple-mentation hurdles. The Government of India has been trying to deploy HECs in rural India for the past two decades, but this intervention has been largely unsuccessful as well.8

The present group of authors has been working on issues related to forest degradation and firewood use in collaboration with the non-governmental organization (NGO) Foundation for Ecological Security in the areas around the Kumbalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary along the Aravali hill range in the semi-arid Mewar region of Rajasthan in India.9 In this location, despite previous efforts, the use of firewood is widespread and persistent (the authors were unable to find HECs in the local markets in the region). In the Bhil communities that reside on the hillsides along the forest preserve, women engage in the quotid-ian activity of firewood harvesting from the forest edge, which may take several hours each day depending on

In BriefApproximately 2.7 billion people worldwide continue to use firewood for their energy and cooking needs leading to negative climate change, health, and ecological impacts. Efforts to replace the highly inef-ficient three-stone hearth stoves used in the majority of these homes with high efficiency cookstoves that cut wood use by half have met with mixed success; in India such efforts have by-and-large failed. Our team has been working on various solutions in the Mewar region of Rajasthan in western India. A result-ing design for a simple, inexpensive (USD $1) device that may be simply placed in existing three-stone hearths has proven to cut wood use and diminish smoke to levels comparable to those achieved by the more expensive high efficiency cookstoves. In field tests in several households as well as in controlled laboratory experiments, it was demonstrated that this simple, unobtrusive, and inexpensive insert has the potential to significantly reduce smoke emissions and related respiratory discomfort and disease in the developing world.

How a Simple, Inexpensive Device Makes a Three-Stone Hearth as Efficient as an Improved Cookstove

by H. S. Udaykumar, A. Kindig, S. Rao, M. Del Viscio, V. Kukillaya, N. L. Panwar, and D. Sharma


proximity to the forest. This harvested wood is burned in a three-stone hearth to prepare two meals each day.

Climate Healers, an NGO based in Phoenix, Arizona tried deploying solar cookstoves in the villages of Rajasthan in 2010, but that effort was unsuccessful for a variety of socio-cultural reasons. Since then, Climate Healers, along with the Foundation for Ecological Security (FES), has been working with researchers at the University of Iowa on a stored-energy solar cook stove that can address the primary reasons for the unsuccessful deployment in 2010. However, progress on this project has been slow due to the difficulties of storing heat under the low-cost constraint. Meanwhile, the carbon offset mechanisms that Climate Healers planned to use to fund the deployment of these stored energy solar cookstoves have become mired in controversy and are largely defunct. Therefore, as of late 2014, the NGOs involved were considering a new course to get over these considerable procedural and technological hurdles. A simpler solution to the firewood use problem in Rajasthan that appeared worthy of exploration was the intro-duction of so-called HECs.

The High Efficiency Cookstove SolutionWhen compared to the traditional three-stone hearths that villagers in Rajasthan use, HECs pack several desir-able features, including cutting down on fuel use, decreasing emissions, and improving portability and durability.10 Indeed, the higher efficiency of the HECs arises due to specific engineer-ing improvements, primarily by ensuring more complete combustion of the wood by improving air supply, removal of ash and embers that may clog the air flow path, better direction of the flame (in the “rocket” stove concept for example) by directing the rising hot air through a channeled space that contacts the bottom of the cooking vessel,11 insulation of the sides

of the stove to prevent heat loss, and a smaller opening at the front of the stove that prevents over-feeding of fuel while simultaneously restricting the loss of heat from the flame. All of these performance improvements derive from application of fluid mechanics and combustion principles in many research laboratories around the world, support from governments and international organizations

(e.g. the World Health Organization (WHO), United States Agency for International Development (USAID) etc.), and the participation of individu-als and communities. In recent times computer simulations have been used to design optimal wood-burning cookstoves.12 The upshot is that the best HECs are quite robust in their delivery of the promised efficiency increase of up to 100 percent over the three-stone hearths (TSH). The HECs

on the market offer efficiency in the 20 to 30 percent range.13 However, in India the uptake of HECs has been low. Currently, only four percent of wood-burning stoves are HECs, while the rest remain the highly inefficient TSHs.7,8 Similar situations prevail in other countries as well.14-17

During winter 2014–2015, members of a multidisciplinary research team from the University of Iowa, including students and NGO workers from FES and Climate Healers, conducted studies in the tribal villages in the Aravali hill region of Rajasthan in an effort to better understand the poor uptake of HECs. The team conducted careful observations of the cooking process as the women in the villages of Karech and Gogunda used two of the top-selling HECs globally (here labelled as A and B to preserve the anonymity of brand names) to cook their normal meals. Through the gracious assistance of the women in the villages and the interpreters who helped us commu-nicate with them, the main reasons for the poor uptake of these stoves in the villages of Rajasthan became quite clear. They are the following:

• The commercial HECs do not accommodate well the wide variety of wood-fuel types that are available in Rajasthan. For instance, the HECs cannot accept large pieces of wood without having them split lengthwise, which is very difficult for the women to do. Women tend to abandon these HECs since their traditional chulhas (mud and brick stoves) have no such size limitation.

• HEC Stove A heated the clay tawa (a vessel for cooking rotis) too much in the center and not enough at the edges, with the result that the women had to constantly rotate the rotis (flatbreads), particularly the corn rotis, in order to cook their meal. Stove A was not nearly as efficient in its use of firewood for cooking as advertised.

Key Concepts

• Firewood burning by the world’s poor for cooking is a major source of black carbon emissions, respiratory illness, and forest degradation.

• Efforts to replace three-stone hearths with high efficiency cookstoves have met with only mixed success; the problem of firewood use for cooking persists.

• In fieldwork in Rajasthan, India, we encountered reluctance among villagers to use high efficiency cookstoves due to design shortcomings and cost.

• To remedy this, an inexpensive insert that can be placed in the three-stone hearth itself was designed and tested. This insert, called Mewar Angithi (MA), cut down smoke production and improved the hearth efficiency to the levels comparable to high efficiency cookstoves.

• The insert is now being distributed in villages in Rajasthan as well as in locations in Kenya and Ghana.


• The mouth of HEC Stove B was too large to fit the clay tawas used in Rajasthan, and the team had to jerry-rig a grill to hold the clay tawa in place. Perhaps as a result, much of the advertised efficiency of HEC Stove B could not be obtained as well.

• In addition to the above performance-related deficiencies of the HECs, the users also identified potential safety issues. The HECs are made of metal, and the sides of the stoves became very hot as cooking progressed. The women expressed concern that children could make contact with the sides of the HECs and burn themselves.

• The durability of the HECs were another issue of concern. In the three-week period of testing in the village, due to the rough handling and high temperatures, the HECs appeared to already exhibit some deterioration. The women expressed concern that the stoves may not last as long as the traditional chulhas and will need to be replaced as opposed to rebuilt (as in the case of chulhas).

• The women typically used a large, slow-burning log in the chulha in the cold season as a source of heat for their homes. The HECs cannot accommodate large logs and thus cannot provide this ancillary role of home heating.

• Though there were some savings in firewood use with the HECs, the women estimated the stoves were worth as little as one-fifth their actual retail prices. Even then, it appeared doubtful that the women would commit even to a reduced amount to cost HEC stoves.

Mewar Angithi: An In Situ Modification of the TSH as a Solution to the ProblemTraditional TSHs or chulhas vary in size and shape to accommodate the differ-ent types of cooking vessels and foods cooked in them across the world. Our experience in Rajasthan showed that a single HEC stove cannot possibly

H. S. Udaykumar Women from the village of Karech at the end of their daily wood collection activity. The piles of wood behind the women were collected on their outing; each pile weighed about 50 pounds (approximately 20 kg).


replace all of these traditional stoves. Rather, significant fuelwood reduc-tions can only be achieved with locally customizable solutions in different parts of the world. Tests with the HECs in the field did confirm however that they can cut wood use significantly (see Table 1) when compared to traditional chulhas. The low smoke effluence and main reductions in firewood use is due to the engineered airflow from below the fuel source in the HECs. Because it lacks such engineered airflow, the traditional chulha tends to accumulate embers that pile up and emit soot as they burn efficiently due to a lack of oxygen.

To address the air flow shortcom-ings of the three-stone hearth, the Mewar Angithi (MA), a simple metal device, was engineered to be placed in a traditional chulha in order to provide the same airflow mechanism in the traditional chulha as occurs in the HEC stoves. A traditional stove burns with good thermal efficiency at the start of the cooking session, but the efficiency deteriorates over time as the embers break off the fuelwood and pile up on the surface of the stove, impeding the airflow. Typically, this efficiency ranges from five to 15 percent. With the MA, airflow is directed from below the fuelwood through holes, as shown

in Figure 1, thus improving efficiency even at the start of the cooking ses-sion. Since the MA provides the means to separate and drain the ash from the fuel, it maintains this engineered air-flow throughout the cooking session, burning up the falling embers cleanly as well. Consequently, the MA facili-tates the traditional chulha to maintain this improved thermal efficiency throughout the cooking session.

For the chulhas found in the Mewar region of Rajasthan, this metal device can be constructed using a trapezoidal bottom metal plate, which can then be welded onto a bent-top metal plate with air holes in it. The top metal

Authors Table 1. Results in the field for tests performed with two different HECs, the traditional chulha and chulha with the MA.

Stove TestedMass of wood

consumed (kg)wood/time (kg/min)

wood/meal unit (wood/corn roti)

Chulha (House 1) 2.785 0.038150685 0.18651446

Chulha (House 2) 2.755 0.031306818 0.136064248

Chulha (House 3) 0.73 0.011230769 0.051287179*

Average for Chulha 0.161289354

HEC-A (House 1) 1.885 0.015708333 0.100795139

HEC-A (House 2) 1.465 0.017650602 0.143920297

HEC-A (House 3) 0.7 0.007291667 0.034993924*

Average for HEC-A 0.122355

HEC-B (House 1) 1.98 0.021290323 0.118870968

HEC-B (House 2) 1.75 0.020588235 0.132679739

HEC-B (House 3) No data No Data No Data

Average for HEC-B 0.125775

Chulha+MA (House 1, trial 1) 1.12 0.014 0.061444444

Chulha+MA (House 1, trial 2) 1.1 0.01375 0.051826923

Chulha+MA (House 2) 1.6675 0.018527778 0.085433642

Average for Chulha+MA 0.066235003


plate can be engineered by bending a square piece of porous metal into a trapezoidal shape with trapezoidal sides (see Figure 1). The resulting insert has a sloped bottom plate so that any ash collected on it can slide down to the exterior. The fuelwood is placed on the top porous plate, and as a result of the airflow from below the fuel source, any embers that break off from the wood would also burn up completely. In the engineering prototype, we used a square bottom metal plate that we also bent into a trapezoidal shape and punched holes in the side of the bent bottom plate so that the top and bottom plates can be held together with metal wires instead of being welded together. We found a porous mild steel metal sheet in the

local market in Udaipur, Rajasthan as scrap metal from the metal washer industry. Such scrap metal sheets are ideal for constructing the MA and can be purchased in local markets at one-fourth the cost of solid metal sheets. We estimate the MA can be fabricated locally at a cost of less than US$1 each. Our initial MA pictured in Figure 1 cost about US$1. In addition, the MA can be easily reshaped and customized in different regions of the world to fit the sizes and shapes of the traditional stoves used in these regions. In recent field work in Rajasthan, we have found the need to customize the MA to the dimensions of the chulhas. Because of the simple, bent plate design of the MA, it is easily customized to indi-vidual chulha units.

Cook Stove Testing Results

Field TestIn preliminary tests involving the cooking of corn rotis and vegetable sabzi (curry), the MA achieved low smoke effluence (as estimated quali-tatively by the users) comparable to both the commercial HECs, while providing around 60 percent reduction in firewood use (as measured quanti-tatively by the research team), which matches the advertised maximum sav-ings of typical HECs. We investigated the users’ perception of HECs (two models: A and B) and compared it to the traditional chulha for cooking their typical meal of corn (makki), flatbreads (rotis), and a side dish of vegetables for families of different sizes.

Authors Figure 1. (a) Schematic of the geometry of the top plate of the two-plate MA model used in the field test in Mewar. The top plate is shown with bends indicated by dashed lines. The bottom plate was of corresponding dimensions but solid. (b) Picture of the MA model used in the field test for which results are tabulated in Table 1. (c) Schematic of the single plate MA used in the lab studies. The bends are shown as dashed lines. (d) Picture of the single plate MA model showing top and side views.

(a)8"

1.5" 1.5"5" 6"

18"

(b)

(c)

(d)


Three households (labeled Houses 1, 2, and 3) were selected, and in each household, the feedback of the users (women) was sought on HEC-A and HEC-B compared to the chulha. In each household, the amount of wood procured for each meal was measured before cooking the meal, and the wood left over after cooking was measured, thereby obtaining the weight of wood used per meal. Unfortunately, results from House 3 were often unreliable

due to operational difficulties that caused large variations in meal size, type, and preparation. Since the meal sizes varied over household, and even day-by-day for any given household, the performances of these stoves were normalized by the meal size and are shown in Table 1 in terms of wood use per meal unit (taken to be one roti).

The MA (Figure 1a) was placed in the chulha in the homes tested and the amount of wood used was measured.

The results indicated that significant gains in efficiency were made even in the TSH using this simple low cost device (see rows labeled TSH+MA in Table 1; for TSH+MA two tests—on different days—were performed in House 1 due to operational difficulties in House 3 as noted above), resulting in approximately 60 percent reduction in wood use relative to TSH alone. During the course of cooking, it was also observed by the research team as well as the users that there was a significant reduction of smoke with the HECs as well as with the TSH+MA case relative to that produced with the TSH alone, though no measurements of emissions were taken in the field. This limited initial field test was promising for the TSH+MA, but the sample size was small and there remained concern over the day-to-day variability of cooking and the lack of quantification of emissions.

Laboratory TestsTo ascertain whether the results for the MA would hold under more controlled and rigorous tests, the Government of India approved the creation of the Cook Stove Testing Center at the Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology, which conducted standard-ized tests by boiling 9.4 liters of water in a traditional stove, with and without the MA. The tests showed that the MA reduced wood use by 63 percent and eliminated 89 percent of soot. One kilo-gram of fuelwood was used without the MA as per standard testing protocols, with wood moisture content of 0.4. The results of the lab tests are summarized in Figure 2.

The MA device in the test was con-structed using a refined version of the design that we reported earlier (Figure 1b). It was built using just one square foot of a scrap metal sheet and can be assembled with simple 90 degree bends, with no need for welding. The resulting device has a simple rectangu-lar cuboidal shape, with dimensions of 6” × 8” × 1.5” and therefore, maintains the surface slope of the traditional

H. S. Udaykumar Solar cookers provided by the NGOs to the village allowed the women to cook rotis, but were not successfully adopted.

A USD $1 insert placed in a traditional three stone hearth leads to low emissions and 60 percent less wood consumption.

Thermal efficiency 9.18% 24.5%

Power rating (KW) 0.503 1.346

CO (gm/MJ) 13.86 5.97

TPM (mg/MJ) 3051.7 344.3

Authors Figure 2. Lab test results comparing the performance of a chulha with and without the insert.


stove. The bends occur in a symmetric fashion so that the assembled device is structurally stable even when the heavy fuelwood is placed on it. Figure 1d shows the top and front views of the device, and Figure 1c shows the angles that need to be made to create the device. In laboratory tests, we have seen that the design of the MA, particularly with regard to the size and placement of the holes, influences its performance. Insufficient holes would impede the separation of the embers and ash, while too many holes would not sufficiently obstruct airflow, and therefore the rising plume that provides oxygen to the flame would not be strong enough. The precise shape of the holes may not play a role. For example, rectangular holes (akin

to those in “grates”) with equivalent blockage (i.e. overall orifice area) may prove equally effective. We are cur-rently performing tests to determine the dependency of the performance of the MA by varying the size and distri-bution of holes and will report on this work in future publications.

The dimensions of the device were chosen to be compatible with the tradi-tional chulhas used in the Mewar region of Rajasthan, India. However, the dimen-sions of the MA can be easily adjusted in different regions of the world to fit the sizes and shapes of the traditional stoves used in those regions. Thus, the MA could prove to be an easily malleable solution for the cook stove deployment problem that has been vexing the world’s policymakers to date.

In recent work in the field, the MA has been supplied to four villages in the Udaipur district of Rajasthan, in the foothills of the Aravalli hills. The data for this implementation study is being accumulated, including performance and emissions of the chulhas in several homes with and without the MA. Preliminary face-to-face queries of the village residents who used the MA indicate that they confirm that the device significantly reduced smoke in their cooking spaces. Further quantitative data on the adoption rates and performance will be reported in the near future. Outreach activities in Ghana and Kenya are also under way and the results from those areas will be reported as well.

H. S. Udaykumar A woman in the village of Karech preparing a meal on a traditional three stone hearth, or chula. The evidence of soot emission can be seen on the wall behind the chulha.


References1. Kaimowitz, D. What causes tropical deforestation?

Forestry Chronicle 78(3), 359–359 (2002).2. Grieshop, A.P., J.D. Marshall, and M. Kandlikar.

Health and climate benefits of cookstove replacement options. Energy Policy 39(12), 7530–7542 (2011).

3. Ramanathan, V. and G. Carmichael. Global and regional climate changes due to black carbon. Nature Geoscience 1(4), 221–227 (2008).

4. Winton, M. Amplified Arctic climate change: what does surface albedo feedback have to do with it? Geophysical Research Letters 33(3), L03701, pages 1–4 (2006).

5. Aggarwal, A.N., K. Umasankar, and D. Gupta. Health-related quality of life in women exposed to wood smoke while cooking. International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease 18(8), 992–994 (2014).

6. Pierson, W.E., J.Q. Koenig, and E.J. Bardana. Potential adverse health-effects of wood smoke. Western Journal of Medicine 151(3), 339–342 (1989).

7. Dalberg Global Development Advisors. Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves: India Cookstoves

and Fuels Market Assessment [online] (2013) http://cleancookstoves.org/resources_files/india-cookstove-and-fuels-market-assessment.pdf.

8. Sinha, B. The Indian stove programme: an insider’s view—the role of society, politics, economics and education. Boiling Point 48, 23–26 (2002).

9. Foundation for Ecological Security [online] http://fes.org.in.

10. Kshirsagar, M.P. and V.R. Kalamkar. A comprehensive review on biomass cookstoves and a systematic approach for modern cookstove design. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 30, 580–603 (2014).

11. Jetter, J.J.and P. Kariher. Solid-fuel household cook stoves: characterization of performance and emissions. Biomass & Bioenergy 33(2), 294–305 (2009).

12. Miller-Lionberg, D. A fine resolution CFD simulation approach for biomass cookstove development [MS Thesis] (2011). Department of Mechanical Engineering, Colorado State University.

13. MNRE-approved high efficiency cookstoves [online]

(2015) http://mnre.gov.in/file- manager/UserFiles/approved-models-of-portable-improved-biomass-cookstove- manufactures.pdf.

14. Bielecki, C. and G. Wingenbach. Rethinking improved cookstove diffusion programs: a case study of social perceptions and cooking choices in rural Guatemala. Energy Policy 66, 350–358 (2014).

15. Jan, I. What makes people adopt improved cookstoves? Empirical evidence from rural northwest Pakistan. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 16(5), 3200–3205 (2012).

16. Levine, D.I., T. Beltramo, G. Blalock, and C. Cotterman. What impedes efficient adoption of products? Evidence from randomized variation in sales orders for efficient cookstoves in Uganda. CEGA Working Paper Series 2012. Center for Effective Global Action, University of California.

17. Troncoso, K., A. Castillo, L. Merino, E. Lazos, and O.R. Masera. Understanding an improved cookstove program in rural Mexico: an analysis from the implementers’ perspective. Energy Policy 39(12), 7600–7608 (2011).

H. S. Udaykumar Placing the Mewar Angithi in the chulha prior to cooking.


ReviewsBook Review

Serving as mayor provides one with an array of opportunities

to demean oneself on a regular basis—funny hats and dunk tanks tend to be involved. However, for me, and for most of the mayors I know, the lowest moments occur in the grandest corporate offices during economic development ‘recruitment’ trips. After schlepping the best and brightest ambassadors from our city to visit the target company, a mayor is given 30 minutes to make their pitch that the company will be happier, more productive, and profitable in their com-munity. A PowerPoint presentation is given focusing on the quality of the schools, the vibrant culture, the ready and able workforce and, of course, how the city is “business friendly.” The mayor wraps up with an impassioned entreaty that a good community could be made great if that company would move their offices to town.

The company’s senior vice president of real estate then offers his thanks and notes that your hometown is indeed a wonderful place, but is deficient in the following ways: access to transportation, high cost of hous-ing, proximity to suppliers, or some combination thereof. He then notes that another city, which happens to possess all of these necessary attri-butes, was just in last week. They have offered a very attractive package of tax breaks and public investments that this mayor would need to beat in order to stay competitive.

Now that the competition and egos between mayors (who are by defini-tion hypercompetitive) are properly stoked, a bidding war ensues and good economic analysis and public policy quickly fall by the wayside. In the end, the company moves to the community it was probably going to move to anyway, but with a generous combina-tion of tax breaks and subsidies that justify the senior Vice President’s salary.

For a generation, Michael Shuman has been a lonely voice arguing against these kinds of deals. In an attempt to bring reason and thoughtfulness to the politics of economic development, he has focused on commonsense econom-ics. His new book, The Local Economy Solution: How Innovative, Self-Financing “Pollinator” Enterprises can Grow Jobs and Prosperity (Chelsea Green, 2015) reiterates the core arguments of his previous works: first, most businesses in the United States are local. Second, local businesses are engines of growth and much more likely to create jobs than large companies. So, cities and states should stop trying to lure huge corpora-tions from one jurisdiction to another and should instead invest in the local businesses that are likely to stay, create jobs, and support the local economy. Shuman was local before local was cool.

Shuman effectively highlights the madness of the traditional and expen-sive economic development approach. He starts with Maryland paying the producers of the Netflix series House of Cards USD $26 million to film the show

in Annapolis, even though the city is disguised as Washington, DC. The film-ing creates 5,900 mostly part-time jobs, which means that the state is paying USD $4,400 per position per year in the best-case scenario, because not all the jobs go to Marylanders who are under-writing this bill with their tax dollars.

Maryland looks good in compari-son to some of the other jurisdictions highlighted by Shuman. Sarasota, Florida offered a Danish pharmaceuti-cal company USD $137 million in incentives to create a mere 191 jobs—and lost to a county in North Carolina. As Shuman points out, USD $137 mil-lion invested in bonds at five percent would generate USD $38,000 annually in perpetuity for every Sarasotian.

These examples are shocking, but it is the aggregate impact that is the most troubling. As governments spend billions to steal businesses from one locality to another, Shuman’s point becomes very clear: “Economic devel-opment today is creating almost no jobs whatsoever…[and it] constitute[s] a net drag on the economy.” Thankfully, his solution to invest more locally is gain-ing traction with policymakers, even

The Local Economy Solutionby Ryan Coonerty

REVIEWINGThe Local Economy Solution: How Innovative, Self-Financing “Pollinator” Enterprises can Grow Jobs and Prosperityby Michael Shuman

Chelsea Green Publishing


ReviewsBook Review

as some high profile governors—now Presidential candidates—continue to buy commercials in other states offer-ing relocation services.

Unfortunately, investing locally is easier said than done. Economies have grown more complex and globalized. Is it better to buy a table made in Malaysia from your local furniture store or from an Etsy artisan 500 miles away? How does, or how should, a community support a business that exports its products globally? Should we consider the nearby publicly traded company part of the local economy, or part of theWall Street economy?

Shuman attempts to create a framework for these kinds of deci-sions through his six “Ps” of local economic development : Planning (understanding opportunities for local businesses to meet local needs); Purchasing (buy local); People (training

local entrepreneurs and employees); Partnership (collaborations of local busi-nesses); Purse (mobilizing local capital); and Public Policy (leveling the regula-tory playing field for local businesses).

From his years consulting with communities and working with and for BALLE (the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies), Shuman offers some interesting direction for these local efforts: they must be self-sustaining and not reliant on grants and goodwill. This is an important point that he reiterates throughout the book, but it also makes for dispiriting reading: a job creator in Appalachia is creating hundreds of jobs at a cost of just USD $500, only to see his funding run out: a successful local coupon book loses popularity; an innovative govern-ment administrator tires of fighting with his Chamber of Commerce and takes a job at a public market.

One must give Shuman credit for pointing out the realities of local economies—they are unique, messy, and reliant on a few key leaders, which is not a good combination when competing against relentless and focused mega-corporations and their lobbyists. However, Shuman offers dozens of potential solutions, such as youth entrepreneurship schools, local debit cards, maker spaces, and coordinated local farmer delivery services. With all of these possible solutions, a community should be able to find a strategy or two that will move the needle.

Small is (or at least has the potential to be) big. Shuman quotes an innovative Melbourne-based developer who argues, “Economic development needs a paradigm shift. It needs to embrace deeper democracy, deeper engagement. It’s not just about economics of money, but cultural economics and human economics. It should be a transforma-tive process, connecting head, heart and hand…we can’t forget the joy and celebration.”

Richard Florida, an economist and best-selling author, has similarly argued that, “For perhaps the first time in human history, the further progress of our economy is inextricably tied up with the further development of our essential humanity.” This is no easy task. Shuman has proven that our current approach is damaging to both our economy and to humanity. With hundreds of cities and local businesses charting their own path and experimenting with how to align capital and community values, perhaps there is some hope for vibrant local economies and maybe even for mayors limiting their public humilia-tion to silly hats instead of the costly service of corporate greed.

Michigan Municipal League Shuman argues that cities should abandon large corporations in favor of investing in local businesses and fueling local economies. In Ann Arbor, Michigan, the city leverages community and cultural events to boost local businesses.


ReviewsMedia Reviews

Saudi Women Making it Work with Social Mediaby Maisam Alahmed

In a faraway kingdom called Saudi Arabia, a young woman of 26 sits in her kitchen waiting for the oven timer to go off. “The order will be delivered at six o’clock,” she texts her customer. She then starts preparing the frosting to finish decorating her perfectly baked cupcakes. She has a strict policy of delivering her goods five minutes before the agreed time. Keeping the cus-tomer happy has never failed her when it comes to her blooming business.

Saudi Arabia’s culture is known for being extremely conservative, espe-cially when it comes to the female half of its population. This conservatism is one of the leading reasons why there are more unemployed women than men, although half of the unemployed women are college educated.

But, where there’s a will, there’s a way. Saudi women have turned to social media to solve their unemploy-ment problem. Three years ago, a new phenomenon appeared on the social networking service Instagram. Women of different ages across the Kingdom started selling homemade cupcakes online. Advertising for their businesses would start with friends and family, and then slowly spread within the area, reaching the furthest house to which a driver could deliver. This idea quickly spread like fire, and selling cupcakes online has become the stereotype of ‘unemployed’ Saudi women.

Today, starting a business on Instagram has expanded far beyond cupcakes. Women are coming up with diverse and creative projects that they advertise and sell online. Each woman utilizes her unique skills, whether it be sewing, cooking, painting, knitting,

decorating, or even party planning to create businesses, allowing them to become more independent individuals with greater control over their lives. These Instagram businesses have created a competitive market among Saudi women, with female business experts and college graduates starting up projects alongside stay-at-home mothers.

This sudden boom of Instagram businesses has expanded so quickly that the Labor Ministry is not yet able to include the income generated in the total of the national informal economy. This social and economic innovation has eased the way for women to avoid the long and brutal process of obtaining a business license, allowing them to be in control of their work hours and employment status, and providing them freedom of creativity in a conservative culture by working from home.

International Labour Organization Instagram businesses have given Saudi women access to the labor force in a country where many obstacles exist to formal female employment.


Solutions in History

At first glance, Britain’s uplands appear to be among the

United Kingdom’s (UK) most natural places. But it takes only the briefest encounter to realize that this is at best a relative claim. Here nonhuman nature and culture have produced hybrid landscapes of an uncertain ontological status. As such, they are frequently the focus of political con-troversy, particularly when human activities seem liable to undermine their apparently natural qualities. In 2015, the uplands are again under such scrutiny. How should they be used? What should we expect of them? And, in particular, should their populations be maintained in situ, pursuing traditional ways of life, or should they be put to new uses? Dartmoor, one of the most celebrated

and mythologized of these British uplands, offers some historical context to our current dilemmas. Understanding Dartmoor’s past can help equip us to think about upland futures.1

Dartmoor, in the county of Devonshire in the southwest of England, tends to be celebrated as ‘unspoiled,’ or a wilderness. It is still possible to provoke a fierce reaction by observing that the denuding of Dartmoor’s woodland in prehistory made it the site of a man-made ecologi-cal catastrophe: the boggy upland we encounter today is as much a scene of ancient devastation as extraordinary natural beauty. Not so long ago Dartmoor was considered a ‘waste,’ an affront to God’s great generosity. In response, the agricultural improvers of

the 19th century looked not to restore woodland and forest but to enclose and transform it into arable land. Entrepreneurs and the state found new ways of exploiting Dartmoor’s natural resources.

During the 19th century, quarrying replaced tin mining as the major source of Dartmoor’s geological wealth. On Dartmoor’s great upland commons, grazing regimes based on transhumance were transformed by the introduction of hardy breeds that allowed year-round grazing. Dartmoor also became host to a notorious prison, a military training ground, and the first of several reservoirs—to this day, water is Dartmoor’s most important natural resource. In the 20th century, these developments were augmented with commercial forestry, which

The Future of Britain’s Uplands: Thinking through Historyby Matthew Kelly

Herry Lawford Dartmoor is one of the most celebrated of the British uplands, and its history has been shaped by human activities.



introduced non-native conifers to the moorscape and, goaded by government incentives, the clear-felling of ancient woodland for replanting also with conifers. Tourism added significant footfall to the mix and by the middle of the 20th century, Dartmoor was heavily exploited, often in quite novel ways.

This pattern of exploitation intensi-fied after Dartmoor became one of the first National Parks in England and Wales in 1951. National Park creation in the UK did not involve the eviction of residents, land expropriation, or for that matter, particularly strong protection against new developments. Instead, National Park status was

principally a planning designation, obliging the new National Park Authorities (NPA) to seek to protect the ‘amenity value’ of the parks. The NPA negotiated with landowners to enhance public access, as well as provide guidelines to help people make the best use of the parks for leisure purposes. Much of this had a strongly paternal bent and was bound up with both the midcentury cult of fresh air and the social democratic turn in British politics. Labour governments initiated the first significant investigation into whether National Parks were suitable for the UK in 1929, but didn’t make the first designations until 1949–1951.

All sorts of controversies animated the politics of Dartmoor National Park in the second half of the 20th century. Proposed new reservoirs, an expanding forestry sector, and the needs of the mili-tary proved particularly contentious. Public enquiries and heated parlia-mentary debates often culminated in a government minister making a decision that divided public opinion. These conflicts were often marked by the ten-sion provoked by differences between local needs and the national purposes of the Park. Most complex were questions concerning the use of the common land that forms the core of the National Park and remains Dartmoor’s most striking environmental feature. In the postwar period, agricultural subsidies incentivized increased production and harvesting causing many to decry the damage done to heathland by overgraz-ing. Many were also concerned about the animal welfare issues raised by ‘outwintering,’ the practice of allowing animals to spend the entire winter in the Park. During the notorious winter of 1962–63, Ministry of Agriculture reports suggest that the sight of malnourished and dying stock as well as numerous corpses shocked even the most hardened agricultural officials.

Many called for outwintering to be banned, agricultural subsidies to be rethought, and the commons to be made subject to closer regulation. Little lead came from government. The Ministry of Agriculture had no inten-tion of restoring traditional grazing regimes which would have disrupted Dartmoor agribusiness, and it was ideologically wary of greater regulation. Nonagricultural opinion was often confounded by the simple truth that there was little the Ministry could insist upon with respect to how farmers exer-cised their rights. Instead the Ministry encouraged voluntary action, taking the line that the commoners knew best how to protect the land and their stock.

James Martin Dartmoor became one of the first National Parks in England and Wales in 1951.



The mood changed in the 1970s, when there was a palpable, if somewhat vague environmental turn in British politics. The National Park Authorities were strengthened and the Dartmoor NPA set about establishing a new management system for the Dartmoor commons. The passage of the Dartmoor Commoners Act in 1985 was accom-panied by intense objections to clauses in the draft legislation that made it the ‘duty’ of the Council to manage, improve, and regulate the common. For a new generation of environmental-ists, the term ‘improvement’ carried significant negative political baggage. It unleashed fears that the moorscape would become subject to reseeding and the use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers, which would endanger an ancient agricultural ecosystem.

The redrafted bill forbade any management technique that was ‘detrimental to the flora, fauna, or geological or physiological features’ of any part of the common designated a Site of Special Scientific Interest, which by the early 1980s was most of it. If this left room for maneuver because what was thought ‘detrimental’ was open to debate, the likelihood that any intervention might be subject to delays was itself a likely deterrent against significant change. As such, the passage into law of the Act was a significant moment in the history of British nature conservation, generating debates that brought to the fore concerns about the effect agricultural intensification would have on upland flora and fauna.

Before the law’s passage, no one was talking about biodiversity, but this changed in 1992 with the UK govern-ment’s positive response to the Rio Earth Summit. In 1994, the publication of the UK Biodiversity Action Plan heralded a new approach to land-scape management, particularly the management of marginal agricultural uplands. Most emphasis was placed

on protecting 391 threatened species, each of which was soon given its own individual species protection plan. As Jamie Lorimer argues of the general approach, the panoptical aspirations of biodiversity were translated into a series of agri-environmental schemes that sought to “maximize the production of biodiversity” by creating environments in which ‘target species’ might flourish.2

Thereafter the Dartmoor Commoners’ Council oversaw the common for grazing purposes according to the agri-environmental agreements now attached to agricultural subsidies. The technicalities of this component of European Union and British envi-ronmental policy are complex, but the consequences have become increasingly evident. Fewer commoners than ever extract a living from the moorscape by grazing stock, and relative destocking has led to significant ‘scrubbing up’ as bracken growth is known on the moor. Visitors encounter a noticeably more verdant moorscape. Active heathland restoration projects have made a differ-ence, too. Long-time visitors, used to a more grazed upland, are beginning to find a Dartmoor that looks like some-where else.

For some commoners, these developments have been distressing. As stock levels are reduced and restric-tions on ‘swaling’ (annual burning) take effect, the ecological make-up of the common has begun to change, with some parts ceasing to provide good grazing.To some commoners, it seems that Natural England, the latest government agency tasked with overseeing environmental policy, is purposefully transforming the landscape into one where grazing will cease to be viable, forcing the last of the active commoners out of business.3

Some think this a good thing. The proselytizing of the journalist George Monbiot has seen the ‘rewilding’ agenda attract popular attention in

the UK, with a new charity dedicated to the cause established in July 2015. Much of the focus has fallen on agriculturally marginal uplands like Dartmoor and the Lake District, notoriously described by Monbiot as ‘sheepwrecked.’4 Like the conserva-tionist William Adams, though with rather more polemical force, Monbiot sees failing upland farming as creating a new environmental management opportunity, and there has been much talk of woodland regeneration and the introduction of wolves, lynx, and non-domesticated ungulates.5

Some nature conservationists, at least in private, take a hard-line view, observing that just as the miners vanished in the 1980s, so might the upland grazers go in the 2020s, representing another set of outmoded economic practices that are unable to survive once state subsidies are removed. Monbiot is not shy of casti-gating graziers as recipients of subsidy, but he does not fully embrace the neoliberal line, arguing instead that this process should only be undergone with the cooperation of the stock-raisers. Ideally, they might be retrained as rewilders, charged with managing new reserves whose main business would be ecotourism.

None of this has gone uncontested. The Shepherd’s Life by James Rebanks, which recounts a year in the life of a Lake District sheep farmer, has been a surprising bestseller, selling thousands of copies. In direct and unassuming, though emotive and sentimental prose, it details the life of Cumbria’s upland sheep farmers, placing particu-lar emphasis on skills and discernment that can only be learned through hard work and respect for elders.6 Any number of sheep farmers—rebranded as shepherds—have taken to Twitter. Photographs of sheep and sheepdogs crop up on many feeds, with hardy upland breeds and their seemingly



quirky expressions proving par-ticularly appealing. Few would have predicted that in 2015, sheep would achieve the charismatic affectivity once associated with whales or pandas.

The rewilding agenda and the role played by social media is new, but the tenor of the debate, particularly ‘below-the-line,’ is not. The rewilders, supposedly comfy in their urban redoubts, are accused of not under-standing the ways of the countryside but happy to consume cheap meat while the sheep farmers are charged with milking taxpayer-funded subsi-dies, paying animal welfare little heed, and arrogantly assuming that they have a right to dictate how a precious national resource—the land—should be used.7,8 Almost every conflict over the British uplands, certainly since the rise of proto-environmental politics in the interwar years, has been conducted in this vein. A more constructive approach might emerge if it is fully accepted that historically, Dartmoor is a hybrid landscape, long the product of interactions between natural

ecological processes and human activity. Grazing regimes are largely responsible for the landscape we encounter today; rewilding might be (partly) responsible for the landscape we encounter in the future. Either way, Dartmoor will remain hybrid, a place profoundly shaped by human wants and desires and, as such, a place of unending political contestation. If uplands like Dartmoor became new wildlife reserves funded partly through tourism, they will remain governmentalized spaces just as they are today.

Presently, rewilding relies on a combination of voluntary action and enthusiastic private landowners. It seems likely that the rewilders will exceed their current modest achievements. But even with the state’s support, it is hard to imagine the rewilders’ greatest ambitions of an all natural reserve replete with non-domesticated animals being fulfilled. To its most zealous supporters this might seem defeatist, but in the long term the success of the rewilding

agenda will be partly measured by its influence on professional conservation practice. As such, it is likely the sharp positioning and fervent debate of 2015 will give way to a period of compro-mise and consensus-building. A close eye should be kept on how established conservation agencies respond to the popularity of this new thinking.9 Moreover, significant species introduc-tions and the transformation of upland farmers into custodians of a different kind of landscape should happen only if it receives a democratic mandate.

The rewilding movement has certainly changed how I see and experience Dartmoor and other UK uplands. If Dartmoor never becomes a place where ‘nature-at-will’ is truly permitted, it is equally so that I and many others don’t share the old preservationist desire to fix Dartmoor in aspic. Nature is constantly in flux, as the dominant ecological paradigm insists, and the impact of climate change means places like Dartmoor will change anyway, whether human beings will it or not.

Andrew RG A sheep farmer at work in Whinfell, England.



Dartmoor has proven malleable and resilient. The improvers did not bring about a radical transformation in the 19th century, but they certainly had some effect. The same can be said of contemporary nature conservation. Our sense of Dartmoor and other British uplands as hybrid landscapes surely means the same will be said of Dartmoor in the early 22nd century: there will be, as historians tend to conclude, change and continuity. But historical understanding must not make us acquiescent in the face of change. On the contrary, historical knowledge teaches us that places like Dartmoor, however wild and inhospitable, have been strongly shaped by human agency, by people

like us making decisions, some good, some bad. We must remain vigilant, ready to take responsibility, whether that means resisting harmful vested interests, however sentimentalized, or questioning our own unexamined com-mitments. This could mean seeking to transform rather than conserve the nonurban environments of the North Atlantic Archipelago, a thought at once empowering and unsettling.

References1. Kelly, M. Quartz and Feldspar. Dartmoor: A British Land-

scape in Modern Times (Random House, London, 2015).2. Lorimer, J. Wildlife in the Anthropocene. Conservation

after Nature (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 2015).

3. Greeves, T. Transactions of the Devonshire Association (Unpublished).

Gerard Mengerink Dartmoor’s wilderness has been shaped by human activity and will continue to be transformed by decisions made by people.

4. Monbiot, G. Feral (Allen Lane, London, 2013).5. Adams, WM. Future Nature: A Vision for Conservation

rev. ed. (Routledge, London, 2003).6. Kelly, M. A shepherd’s life by James Rebanks.

Quartz and Feldspar [online] (2015) http://quartzandfeldspar.com/2015/06/20/a-shepherds-life-by-james-rebanks/.

7. Monbiot, G. Let’s make Britain wild again and find ourselves in nature. The Guardian [online] (July 16, 2015) http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/16/britain-wild-nature-rewilding-ecosystems-heal-lives.

8. Meanwell, A. As a shepherd, I know we have not ‘sheepwrecked’ Britain’s landscape. The Guardian [online] (July 21, 2015) http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/21/farmers-sheep-lake-district-preserve-environmentalists?CMP=twt_environment^gdneco.

9. Kelly, M. Rewilding Britain/England’s wildlife wonders. Quartz and Feldspar [online] (2015) http://quartzandfeldspar.com/2015/07/20/rewilding-britain-englands-wildlife-wonders/.


On The Ground

Honduras is a very small, but highly biodiverse Latin

American nation whose natural resources are worth preserving. Almost half of the country’s surface is still covered by forests and a quarter of it has the legal status of protected area.1 However, as this developing nation of eight million people faces development pressure, the question arises as to which is the best way to manage natural resources—privately or commonly?

Regardless of being owned by an indi-vidual, a group of people, or the State, a natural resource still faces the risk of being managed unsustainably and inequitably. No property rights system is intrinsically efficient; cases of failure, as well as success, exist for each of these property regimes.2 Hence, if no superior-ity of one particular form of ownership over another can be justified,3 why has much of the world today decided to rely on private markets as their dominant form of resource allocation?

A key factor contributing to the supremacy of private property is that the conditions favoring common ownership have been weakened or eroded over time. Policies and national legislations have played a specific role in the decline of common property regimes. State laws have failed to codify customary common-property institutions, or have eliminated them by land reform policies that favor individual and government ownership.4

Levelling the Playing Field: Strengthening Common Property in Honduran Legislationby Amparo Cerrato

Amparo Cerrato Pech Indigenous Community of Culuco where the Honduran Government legalized a common property land title.


On The Ground

Honduras is one of the countries whose legal framework has discrimi-nated against common property, but despite this biased environment, several local communities have reacted against it. These communities in central and northern Honduras have created what several scholars refer to as ‘Common Asset Trusts.’5 In this particular case, the trust (although communities do not formally name it this way) is established at a local level and seeks to protect the watersheds of one or several villages. Through collec-tive efforts, locals raise enough money to buy off ownership or land-use rights from upstream holders located in their catchment area. The acquired land is set aside under protection measures, and as an asset owned by the entire community. The incentives behind this community initiative are simple: they wish to protect the water supply of their current and future genera-tions. However, specific legislative reforms designed to support common-property regimes, such as these local trusts, are still needed in Honduras, as the discrimination against them has been considerable.

The Undermining of Common-Property SystemsResources can be effectively managed under common property regimes if cooperative institutions that establish rules and assure compliance exist.6 So why do private and state property regimes enjoy a privileged position in the land regulations of many coun-tries? Colonization is a key factor that cannot be overlooked. In colonized countries like Honduras, colonialists often dismantled communal property institutions and systems as a prelude to the establishment of their colonial economies.7 Honduras has inherited almost its entire legal framework from its colonizer country. The doctrine of jura regalia, by which the

Spanish Crown proclaimed itself as rightful owner of the Honduras ter-ritory and its resources in the 1500s, remains enshrined in today’s repub-lican system. The current Honduran Constitution grants the state owner-ship rights over all land, water, forest, and mineral resources that are still not privately owned.8 Furthermore, some laws established the clearing of state-owned land as a valid mechanism for individuals to stake a claim and ultimately obtain a title deed over it. Thus, the discrimination against the traditional collective property system in the country’s legislation is evident.

A more recent factor that undermined common property systems worldwide was the incorrect interpretation of Garret Hardin’s influential article, “Tragedy of the Commons.”9 In his paper, Hardin was

actually describing the failure of an open access resource—one where no restraint exists for anybody who wants to use a resource—a situation that can lead to its overuse and degradation. On the contrary, a common property regime entails controlled access and regulations between its users in ways that promote the sustainable use of the resource. However, Hardin’s arguments have been incorrectly used to equate common property systems with open access regimes, and thus legitimize land policies that favor individual and state ownership.10

Since the 1960s, land distribution programs have been one of the main policies implemented by Honduran governments to tackle the poverty and social vulnerability suffered by the majority of the population. Yet neither the agrarian reform in

Amparo Cerrato A Pech indigenous woman and her baby from the community of Jocomico, located within the Man and Biosphere Reserve of Rio Platano, Honduras.


On The Ground

effect until the early 1990s nor the individual land titling programs implemented afterwards were able to eradicate the country’s endemic land tenure inequalities. For instance, in the northern valley of Aguán, which is one of Honduras’ most fertile agri-cultural lands, latifundios, or extensive parcels of privately owned lands, have increased considerably since the 1990s, and so has the number of poor farmers without land in the area.11

The ‘legal’ privatization and expro-priation of common property systems has represented an ideal complement to neoclassical economics which

claims that competitive markets are needed to achieve greater investment, economic efficiency, and growth.12 Individual land titling programs implemented by various national governments around the world (many with the support of international development agencies) were consid-ered a necessary step to achieve these desired competitive markets. Yet, the land privatization policies have had limited success in accomplishing their intended objectives.13

In the case of Honduras, more than 60 percent of its territory is covered with rugged mountains. Only 15

percent of the country’s land qualifies as arable land, which, like the Aguán Valley, largely consists of latifundios. Many Honduran rural families live a marginal existence in the degraded slopes of the country’s mountainous interior.14 It is no surprise then that a large portion of the individual plots allocated through the land privatization programs are so small or marginal that poor landholders cannot significantly benefit from them or are unable to retain them. Likewise, land measurement, titling, registration, and transfer have imposed high transaction costs on small landowners. Conditions

CIPF-ICF, 2015Map of Honduras indicating the public forests where the Honduran government has or is in the process of recognizing land rights in favor of local and indigenous communities.


On The Ground

of inequality were, in some cases, aggravated as a result of these land policies; people with greater resources and connections were able to obtain ownership documents while others were excluded. Furthermore, private banks may still not consider these land-holders as creditworthy, even if they possess a land title.15 Consequently, individual land ownership and mar-kets may prove inadequate to deliver the efficient, sustainable, and equitable outcomes that society pursues. For certain resources, common property regimes may provide better results than private ownership.16

Local Common-Asset Trusts for Watershed Protection in HondurasThe land tenure regime present in a watershed could play an important role in the success of a watershed management policy.17 One study reveals that after the implementation of a watershed development project in North-East India, areas under a community ownership system had produced more positive changes in land-use patterns than the watersheds under an individual property regime.18 Comparative studies such as this do not exist for Honduran watersheds.

However, the efforts of several rural communities in the country towards managing their local or micro watershed areas under a common property arrangement have increased. A reason for this increase could be that local watersheds are considered a resource in which collective action and common ownership are easier to implement.19

The types of Common Asset Trusts implemented by some Honduran communities oppose the State land policies that have transformed collective property systems into individual landholdings. In fact what

Amparo Cerrato Entrance sign to the Man and Biosphere Reserve of Rio Platano, Honduras. It states that the area has more than 40,000 inhabitants, half of which are indigenous people.


On The Ground

communities do is revert this process by transforming private land-holdings into an asset that belongs to all members of the village. Through com-mendable efforts, a single community or a group of communities collect the funds needed to buy off ownership or land use rights from upstream landholders located in their micro watershed area. In many cases, these upstream landholders also belong to the community; thus, the transaction costs of negotiating the deal, and sometimes even the land sale price, are reduced. Once the property rights for the area have been acquired by the community, a set of rules is designed for its management.

Specific rules can vary between communities but the following gen-eral rules are present in all cases: 1) the acquired land is considered a common property asset and must remain as such so it can benefit the community’s future generations; consequently, the area cannot be sold and no individual ownership right can be granted over it; 2) the land is set aside for watershed protection; activities within the area that can affect this function such as farming, grazing, and logging are regu-lated or even banned; and 3) a legal entity, which is usually the local Water Management Board, is entrusted with the management of the asset. The law allows this community organization to manage funds, implement projects, and execute any contracts necessary to fulfil its mandate. Yet, since the asset was acquired using community funds and for the purpose of providing a common good, the water manage-ment board (or any other community organization acting as the trustee) will be held accountable for any violation of their responsibilities.20

Despite the advantages that these common local trusts may provide at the micro watershed level, optimal hydrogeological management also

requires coordinated actions at the macro watershed scale.21 Collaborative arrangements are also needed to promote interaction and coordination among micro watershed management bodies located within the larger macro watershed.22 The new Honduran Water Law mandates the creation of watershed councils at the village, municipality, state, and national levels.23 These types of nested institu-tions are important for coordinating actions at all relevant scales. However, to this day, only a few councils have been organized. In fact, large portions of the new Honduran Water Law are still not being implemented. The activation of these water councils could enhance the protection of exist-ing common watershed trusts and promote the creation of new ones.

Mechanisms for Legally Strengthening Common-Property Regimes in HondurasOver the last decade, the Honduran government has passed new regula-tions that are more supportive of common property systems. The new Forestry Law, approved in 2007, gives a preferential right to local communi-ties to manage state-owned forests through community forest manage-ment schemes. Before this regulation, most public forests were auctioned off to timber companies. Likewise, the Property Law of 2004 recognizes the communal and inter-communal mechanisms of collective ownership

that finally codified (to some extent) the customary tenure systems of the country’s indigenous peoples. However, these types of reforms were not something Honduran society accomplished easily. For instance, the approval of the Forestry Law involved a long process of multi-sector public discussions that extended over three presidential periods and over 10 dis-tinct bills. The sanctioning of the final law after 12 years of discussions was celebrated as a success of civil society participation.

Despite these positive advances, further legal reforms are still needed, especially for the protection of institu-tions like local common watershed trusts. First, a fundamental reform is required at the constitutional level. The Honduran Constitution clearly

states that private property rights will be respected and protected, yet no equal statement is made about the protection of common property rights.24 Common property rarely enjoys the same degree of support in law or prompts the same response from government authorities as private property.25 The Honduran Constitution must clearly acknowl-edge that other legitimate forms of resource ownership and management do exist and that all will enjoy equal protection under the law.

Likewise, common property regimes without documented legal backing will continue to be exposed

The Honduran Constitution must clearly acknowledge that other legitimate forms of owning and managing a resource do exist and that all will enjoy equal protection under the law.


On The Ground

to the risks introduced by even the best intentioned government initia-tives.26 As a result, formal titling and registration of indigenous and local common property systems is needed to better protect them from compet-ing claims. This documentation and registration has to be done with the previous consent of communities and by accommodating the State laws to the customary tenure systems and interests of the indigenous and local groups. Indigenous communi-ties should not be forced to modify their traditional land institutions and norms so that they can comply with the recognition requirements imposed by State legislations, which are largely grounded on colonialist legal principles.

Reforms are also needed in the country’s national cadastre. This important land database should con-tain information that goes beyond the boundaries and legal identifiers of the country’s land parcels. The ecosystem services provided by common property areas (and all other property systems) should start to be incorporated in the national cadastre, even if it is at a basic level. This approach can help us value the environmental, cultural, spiritual, and social roles of land, and not only its legal and economic-market function, which are the only aspects currently reflected in the national cadastre.

Finally, adopting a rights-based approach is crucial for strengthening common property regimes. If indi-vidual private ownership was largely promoted in the name of market effi-ciency, a similar mistake should not be made by encouraging the protection of common property systems in the name of environmental conservation. Communities must hold the right to choose how they want to own and manage their land resources.

A Pluralistic and Inclusive Land-Tenure LegislationI can still remember the conversation I had a few years ago with a village elder of a community that wanted to create a common-asset trust to manage their watershed. For him, as well as for the majority of his com-munity members, a vital and sensitive resource, like water, should not belong to a single individual because that is not only dangerous, but unfair. I told him about a particular case in which the Honduran Supreme Court granted a USD $1 million compensa-tion to an individual who privately owned an area where a spring that supplied drinking water to several communities was located. This landowner was against the land-use restrictions that the Forestry Agency had imposed on him in order to protect the quality of the water for downstream communities. He argued before the Court that such restrictions violated his constitutional right to private property, and the judge agreed with him. The village elder vehemently reacted: “You see, [it is] because of cases like that one that we want our watershed to be owned by the entire community and not a single person, but we are afraid that even if we do raise the money we need to buy off the land-use rights, someone might still come tomorrow saying the land is theirs because they’ve managed somehow to get a private property title over it, and we know that, in this legal system, the ones who have docu-ments, even if they do not have the real rights, will always win!”

After listening to the elder’s views, I could not help thinking that reforms that better protect the common property that better protect the common property rights of local and indigenous communities are needed, particularly if they involve resources upon which their livelihoods greatly

depend, such as water and forests. Certainly, common property sys-tems are not a panacea for poverty alleviation, sustainable forestry, or watershed management and they may be inappropriate to implement in different contexts. Honduras’ legal framework should be pluralistic, adaptive, innovative, and above all inclusive. It should not undermine common property regimes in order to privilege other property systems that are just as imperfect. Whether private, state, or common property (or even a hybrid between these tenure systems), they all have an important role to play in sustainable resource management. I am only advocating for a levelled playing field.

References1. Instituto Nacional de Conservación y Desarrollo

Forestal, Areas Protegidas y Vida Silvestre (ICF) (National Institute of Forestry, Protected Areas and Wildlife Conservation and Development). Anuario Estadístico Forestal 2013 Honduras (Forestry Statistical Yearbook 2013 Honduras). Government of Honduras, Tegucigalpa [online] (2013) www.reddccadgiz.org/documentos/doc_1199314319.pdf.

2. Dietz, T, E. Ostrom, and P. Stern. The Struggle to Govern the Commons. Science, Vol. 302 (2003).

3. Agrawal, A. Common Property Institutions and Sustainable Governance of Resources. World Development, Vol. 29, No. 10 (2001).

4. Arnold, JEM. Managing forests as common property. FAO Forestry Paper 136 [online] (1998) http://www.fao.org/docrep/w8210e/w8210e00.htm.

5. Costanza, R et al. Building a Sustainable and Desirable Economy-in-society-in-nature, (ANU Press, Canberra, ACT, 2013).

6. Ostrom, E., J. Burger, C. Field, R. Norgaard, and D. Policansky. Revisiting the Commons: Local Lessons, Global Challenges. Science, Vol. 284, No. 278 (1999).


8. Constitucion de la República de Honduras (Constitution of the Republic of Honduras). Government of the Republic of Honduras [online] (1982) http://honduras.net/honduras_constitution.html.

9. Hardin, G. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, Vol. 162, No. 3859 (1968).



On The Ground

11. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). En Tierra Segura. Desastres Naturales y Tenencia de la Tierra, Honduras (On Solid Ground. Natural Disasters and Land Tenure, Honduras) [online] (2010) www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1255b/i1255b01.pdf.

12. Zoomers, A. Globalisation and the foreignisation of space: seven processes driving the current global land grab. The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2 (2010).

13. Assies, W. Land tenure, land law and development: Some thoughts on recent debates. The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol. 36, No. 3 (2009).

14. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). En Tierra Segura. Desastres Naturales y Tenencia de la Tierra, Honduras (On Solid Ground. Natural Disasters and Land Tenure, Honduras) [online] (2010) www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1255b/i1255b01.pdf.

15. Zoomers, A. Globalisation and the foreignisation of space: seven processes driving the current global land grab. The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2 (2010).

16. Farley, J., R. Costanza, G. Flomenhoft, and D. Kirk.

The Vermont Common Assets Trust: An institution for sustainable, just and efficient resource allocation. Ecological Economics, Vol. 109 (2015).

17. Swallow, B., N. Johnson, A. Knox, and R. Meinzen-Dick. Collective Action and Property Rights for Sustainable Development: Property Rights and Collective Action in Watersheds. Focus 11, Brief 12 of 16, International Food Policy Research Institute (2004).

18. Singh, S.B., K.K. Datta, and S.V. Ngachan. Impact of Land Tenure System in Watershed Development Programmes in the Meghalaya State, North-East India. Agricultural Economics Research Review, Vol. 19 (2006).

19. Kerr, J. Watershed Management: Lessons from Common Property Theory. International Journal of the Commons, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2007).

20. Decree No. 253-2013, Ley de Patronatos y Asociaciones Comunitarias (Trusts Act and Community Partnerships). Government of the Republic of Honduras [online] (2013) http://www.tsc.gob.hn/biblioteca/index.php/leyes/535-ley-de-patronatos-y-asociaciones-comunitarias.

21. Swallow, B., N. Johnson, A. Knox, and R. Meinzen-Dick.

Collective Action and Property Rights for Sustainable Development: Property Rights and Collective Action in Watersheds. Focus 11, Brief 12 of 16, International Food Policy Research Institute (2004).

22. Kerr, J. Watershed Management: Lessons from Common Property Theory. International Journal of the Commons, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2007).

23. Decree No. 253-2013, Ley de Patronatos y Asociaciones Comunitarias (Trusts Act and Community Partnerships). Government of the Republic of Honduras [online] (2013) http://www.tsc.gob.hn/biblioteca/index.php/leyes/535-ley-de-patronatos-y-asociaciones-comunitarias.

24. Constitucion de la República de Honduras (Constitution of the Republic of Honduras). Government of the Republic of Honduras [online] (1982) http://honduras.net/honduras_constitution.html.



Amparo Cerrato Women participating in a land tenure meeting in the community of Villa Santa in eastern Honduras, an area under community-based forest management.

“Why is it that after 60 years of international policy aiming to promote development that so many people around the world still live in poverty?”Associate Professor Sharon BessellLecturer in ‘Development theories and themes’ and ‘Global social policy’

Discover what drives the international development agenda with a Master of Public Policy.

Join the Thought Leaders at ANU.

CR

ICO

S P

rovi

der

: 001

20C

MO

_CA

P15

219

Bac

kgro

und

imag

e by

Hug

i Óla

fsso

n, F

lickr

ANU Crawford School of Public Policycrawford.anu.edu.au