Haya tena watanza wenye nia njema tunakutana kwa mara nyingine katika uwanja wetu wa mazingira na maliasili. Samahani kwa kuwa kimya kwa muda mrefu, ila tupo pamoja siku zote. Mada yetu ya leo kwa kweli ni hot issue kwa sasa hapa duniani. Si mnakumbuka juzi juzi tu kulikua na kikao juu mabadiliko ya tabia nchi kilichoandaliwa na Umoja wa Mataifa? Nikwambieni kitu cha kuchekesha, msafara wa Tanzania unaambiwa ulikua mkubwa kuliko hata wa China na Marekani, ilhali hizo nchi ndio zinazoshutumiwa kwa kusababisha mabadiliko haya!!
Kwa mujibu wa "wataalamu" wa sayansi ya tabia nchi, kasi ya mabadiliko kwa sasa ni ya kutisha kutokana na shughuli za wanadamu, na inasemekana joto linaongezeka kwa kasi ambayo haijawahi kutokea hapo awali. Mdahalo wa ili suala kwa kweli wadau ni mkubwa mno. Kuna wanaosema kua "wataalamu" hawa wanamanipulate na kucook data ili ionekana kua kuna tatizo la kutisha wakati tatizo si la kutisha sana; na hawa wanaamini kua mabadiliko haya hayasababishwi na wanaadamu, bali ni mifumo tu ya ulimwengu na jua (solar system). Wanasema wanaadamu wanapandikiziwa mzigo husio wao, wanauliza mbona hata wakati wa Yusuf kule Misri, kuliktokea baa la ukame na njaa kwa miaka saba? Je, hiyo nayo utaiitaje? Pia wanauliza mbona kulikua na kipindi kilichoitwa ice age? Na kilitoweka tu mara moja, na baadhi ya masalia ya kipindi hiko ni mlima Kilimakyaro. Kiujumla wanasisitiza kua, mabadiliko ya tabia nchi yalikuwepo siku zote na yataendelea kuwepo, hisiwe leo wana wa Adamu wakabebeshwa mzigo husio wao.
Kwa upande mwingine, kuna hawa ambao wanasisitiza kuwa, yanatokea sasa hivi yote yanasababishwa na wana wa Adamu. Hapa kuna umoja wa mataifa, na mashirika yake kama, mapngo wa mazingira (UNEP), mtandao wa jumuiko la serakali la mabadiliko ya tabia nchi (IPCC), na sasa nyingi ya nchi maskini nazo zinaanza kushabikia huu wimbo kwa sababu ya fursa za mishiko zinazokuja na nyimbo hii. Hawa wanasema binadamu ndio chanzo, na ndio anapaswa kuwajibika katika kupunguza na kukabiliana na tatizo ili. Sawa, je, Marekani na China si ndio vyanzo katika hili? Je, wanafanya nini zaidi ya kusukuma majukumu kwa nchi maskini kwa mtindo wa kuleta pesa chafu (nasikia wanafanya money laundering) kupitia mikakati yao kama vile REDD (Reduced Emission through Decreased Forest Degradation), na pia biashara ya gesi mkaa (carbondioxide)?!!?!?! Hii biashara ya gesi mkaa tena imeng'ang'aniwa sana nchi Marekani and Norway, kwa sababu, kupitia biashara hii wataweza kutoa zaidi gesi mkaa ilhali kuna nchi maskini ambazo zipo tayari kuuza viwango vyao vya utowaji wa gesi hiyo, ili kupata faida. Je, hapo Marekani na wenzake wanawajibika au wanatuwajibisha?!??
Jamani, kwa leo naomba niishe hapa tu. Ila haya ni maoni yangu, nakaribisha pia michango yenu wadau. Asanteni.
Kwa mujibu wa "wataalamu" wa sayansi ya tabia nchi, kasi ya mabadiliko kwa sasa ni ya kutisha kutokana na shughuli za wanadamu, na inasemekana joto linaongezeka kwa kasi ambayo haijawahi kutokea hapo awali. Mdahalo wa ili suala kwa kweli wadau ni mkubwa mno. Kuna wanaosema kua "wataalamu" hawa wanamanipulate na kucook data ili ionekana kua kuna tatizo la kutisha wakati tatizo si la kutisha sana; na hawa wanaamini kua mabadiliko haya hayasababishwi na wanaadamu, bali ni mifumo tu ya ulimwengu na jua (solar system). Wanasema wanaadamu wanapandikiziwa mzigo husio wao, wanauliza mbona hata wakati wa Yusuf kule Misri, kuliktokea baa la ukame na njaa kwa miaka saba? Je, hiyo nayo utaiitaje? Pia wanauliza mbona kulikua na kipindi kilichoitwa ice age? Na kilitoweka tu mara moja, na baadhi ya masalia ya kipindi hiko ni mlima Kilimakyaro. Kiujumla wanasisitiza kua, mabadiliko ya tabia nchi yalikuwepo siku zote na yataendelea kuwepo, hisiwe leo wana wa Adamu wakabebeshwa mzigo husio wao.
Kwa upande mwingine, kuna hawa ambao wanasisitiza kuwa, yanatokea sasa hivi yote yanasababishwa na wana wa Adamu. Hapa kuna umoja wa mataifa, na mashirika yake kama, mapngo wa mazingira (UNEP), mtandao wa jumuiko la serakali la mabadiliko ya tabia nchi (IPCC), na sasa nyingi ya nchi maskini nazo zinaanza kushabikia huu wimbo kwa sababu ya fursa za mishiko zinazokuja na nyimbo hii. Hawa wanasema binadamu ndio chanzo, na ndio anapaswa kuwajibika katika kupunguza na kukabiliana na tatizo ili. Sawa, je, Marekani na China si ndio vyanzo katika hili? Je, wanafanya nini zaidi ya kusukuma majukumu kwa nchi maskini kwa mtindo wa kuleta pesa chafu (nasikia wanafanya money laundering) kupitia mikakati yao kama vile REDD (Reduced Emission through Decreased Forest Degradation), na pia biashara ya gesi mkaa (carbondioxide)?!!?!?! Hii biashara ya gesi mkaa tena imeng'ang'aniwa sana nchi Marekani and Norway, kwa sababu, kupitia biashara hii wataweza kutoa zaidi gesi mkaa ilhali kuna nchi maskini ambazo zipo tayari kuuza viwango vyao vya utowaji wa gesi hiyo, ili kupata faida. Je, hapo Marekani na wenzake wanawajibika au wanatuwajibisha?!??
Jamani, kwa leo naomba niishe hapa tu. Ila haya ni maoni yangu, nakaribisha pia michango yenu wadau. Asanteni.
Posts
One thing that we need to understand before proceeding further in this discussion is that, economic development is inextricable to green house gases emissions. This is why we need to ask ourselves key questions. Why did Kyoto protocol fail? Why does US don’t want to sign the climate change multilateral agreements? Why there is a need to include all the nations in combating the global warming? Why are the poor nations so vulnerable in the changing climate? Is it true that US and other nations want to undermine the poor nations? Is it true that they just want to make profit?
ReplyDeleteTo answer these questions, we first need to analyze the problem. Why is it global? It is global due to the marginal damages coming from the green house gases. The green house gases have nature of stock pollutants because they keep increasing as more fossil fuels get burnt. Which means the marginal damages need to be shared across the globe. But the cost of sharing differs from state to state. But, the burden to cut emissions and pay for the emissions has to be different across countries although sharing is necessary.
Let me touch the base of this discussion. Why did Kyoto protocol fail? There are number of reasons why it didn’t work. I don’t want to go into more detailed analysis on this. But, the main reason for the failure is the inclusion of relatively small number of countries that have agreed to take action (Olmstead and Stavins, 2009). The concept of poor countries not being participants in payment for cutting emissions has drove some countries ‘emerging economies’ such as Brazil, Indonesia and China to hide under the umbrella of developing countries.
Why does US do not participate in many agreements? The cost to cut emissions Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) is very high. For a few countries to pay debt on global warming is a big burden while there are so many countries contributing to the emissions. Inclusion of other countries is necessary for reducing MAC. If developing countries are not included, production of carbon-intensive goods and services may shift outside the coalition of participating countries, making developing countries’ economies more carbon intensive than they otherwise would be, through emissions leakage (Olmstead and Stavins, 2009). It impossible to disentangle Global warming solutions and economies of countries. This is why other countries are reluctant in participating because they see China walking free as if it’s not a big polluter.
Why poor countries are so vulnerable with the changing climate? Many poor countries are located in the hot climates. This means that as the earth gets warmer we face more problems than rich countries (cold climates). This means that there is need for us to take action in overcoming the global warming.
Coming back to the key issue, is it true that REDD and Carbon trade are meant to undermine poor countries? I will discuss briefly the concept of REDD due to space. I have mentioned the vulnerability of our countries with the changing climate. The vurnarability issue force to adopt to changing climate in several ways because even the rainfall patterns have shown extensive droughts in many Sub-Saharan Africa. The trend of which force many countries into food shortage. Agriculture is a key point in many African countries. Overcoming that hurdle we need to protect our forests by reducing deforestation. Deforestation in many Sub-African Countries arises from agricultural practices. This implies that there is a need to adopt the REDD program.
Efficiency in terms of agriculture practices so as to increase output and reduce pressure on the forests. The other issue is the well-planned financial mechanism for REDD. That local communities should be the most beneficiaries of the REDD scheme. This underlies the concept of global participation on reducing emissions.
Finally, the concept of rich countries getting profit is very wrong. There is no profit being made, but providing incentives for people not to cut down trees.
It is all true man..but remember that a strategy that is not initiated by local people themselves will never work out. REDD is just another song that is brought by the NORTHERN countries, so how do you think it will work in the SOUTHERN countries? Mipango yote na mikakati ambayo common wananchi hajashiriki kuipanga mzee itakua ni vigumu kufanikiwa. Common wananchi don't know about REDD, they even did not participate in initiating REDD in Tanzania, for my case. So do you think there will be sense of ownership? Do you think REDD will be benefit the common wananchi with them not knowing what is REDD?! How will REDD fund be effectively and efficiently used with poor forest governance experienced in Tanzania?
ReplyDeleteI am not against any of your arguments, but you have to be critical, see the other sides too, and then conclude whether, it is viable or not.