That Development Lady

September 12, 2009

At a time when Europe struggles to emerge from economic recession, the European Union vows to create indicators for its well-being that go beyond calculating the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The European Commission said Tuesday that it will propose in 2010 a pilot environmental index that complements GDP as a measure of progress by gauging water use and pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, loss of natural landscapes, air pollution and waste generation.

The EU also plans to implement more timely social indicators, including more accurate reporting on inequality.

“GDP was not intended to be a measure of well-being,” a Commission press release said Tuesday. “It doesn’t pick up on issues that are vitally important to the quality of our lives such as a clean environment, social cohesion or even how happy people are.”

The proposals are part of the Union’s efforts to make the shift towards a low-carbon, resource-efficient economy.

“To meet the challenges of the 21st century we need more integrated and transparent policies,” European Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said in the press release. “To change the world we need to change the way that we understand the world, and to do this we need to go beyond GDP.”

The proposed actions, however, will only complement, and not replace, GDP as a yardstick of economic and social development.

Introduced after the Great Depression in the 1930s, GDP measures the total final market value of all goods and services produced within a country during a given period. Although it effectively indicates a country’s economic growth, it has long been criticized by civil society groups for overlooking non-marketed economic activities as indicators of well-being and wealth.

Despite the Commission’s plans to move beyond it, however, some NGOs are still skeptical, EUobserver reported.

“Fifteen years have passed since initial discussions, and we are no closer to implementing measures for environmental sustainability, societal progress and well-being,” said Tony Long, director of the European Policy Office at the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

He added that the Commission’s plans also exclude other indices, such as WWF’s “Living Planet Index” – which reflects the health of the planet’s ecosystems — and the “Ecological Footprint” — which shows the extent of human demand on these ecosystems

via

Fabien Cousteau says the oceans can recover, but policies need to be enforced. He also cautiously favors aquaculture.

All he asks is 10 percent.

In order to help revive the world’s oceans, one of the initial steps should be to make around 10 percent of them zones free from human activity, according to aquatic environmentalist Fabien Cousteau.

“We need to make 10 percent of our oceans no-take zones, places akin to national parks,” he said in an interview. “If you give nature a chance to recuperate, it will.”

Cousteau, grandson of the famed oceanographer Jacques Cousteau, will speak tomorrow at the Water Innovations Alliance taking place this week in Chicago. Other speakers include University of Illinois professor Mark Shannon, who will discuss a device he wants to make that will convert sewage into re-useable water, methane, and minerals that can be sold on the open market. (Other interesting water ideas – check out IBM’s concept for electricity from osmotic pressure gradients.)

One of the chief problems facing the oceans is a lack of stewardship. Approximately 70 percent of our daily food intake comes from aquatic environments. That includes fish, but also additives like the kelp in ice cream. At the same time, these environments are simply being over-exploited. Fisheries have decimated the populations of large fin fish like tuna and cod. Many have shifted to the once-dubbed trash fish, but even these populations are shrinking. Pollution levels continue to rise.

“We’ve taken out over 50 percent of our total fish stocks compared to 50 years ago,” he said. “We use the ocean as an endless resource and a garbage can.”

So what can be done besides establishing no-go zones? First, information about the problem has to be brought to greater attention to the public, he said. Governments and others also have to dedicate more research funding. Ocean research gets about 1/100thof the amount of money that space exploration gets.

“We have maybe explored 2 to 3 percent of the ocean and I guarantee you that there is a much higher chance that we will find interesting forms of life in the ocean,” said Cousteau.

Industrialized aquaculture will also likely need to expand. Fifty percent of humanity’s fish intake already comes from aquaculture.

“I tend to think it is going to be necessary to continue that and probably increase it,” he said. “If it is tailored to the specific fish and environment, it can be done properly… The reality is that there isn’t enough wild stock left to feed the world’s population.”

Still, fish farms will have to avoid releasing pollutants into the natural environment. The economics and energy transfer of fish farming also need to be scrutinized.

“It makes absolutely no sense to feed 2 pounds to a cod to make 1 pound of fish,” he said.

And, of course, human societies have to figure out a way through its own water crisis.

“Without fresh water, there is no life on this planet,” Cousteau said. “Water is the most valuable resource on this planet, bar none. You can’t drink oil and you can’t drink gold.”

via

The No Child Left Inside Act aims to trade computer screens for grass-stained jeans.
By Robynne BoydTue, Aug 18 2009 at 5:50 AM EST

GARDEN CLASSROOM: Environmental education has enjoyed the spotlight since First Lady Michelle Obama started working with kids in the new White House garden. (Photo: Win McNamee/Getty Images)   Imagine a day when humans are so adept at punching buttons and wiggling joysticks that our thumbs evolve to be exceptionally large and brains uncommonly small. Sound like science fiction? Perhaps. But Ira Blumenthal, director of the Captain Planet Foundation, which promotes children’s environmental education and literacy, believes humanity is headed in this direction unless children start getting out more.   “If you ask a 4- or 5-year-old where a carrot comes from, they usually say from a grocery store and their mom buys it in a bag,” Blumenthal says. “The only way to study the environment is to get outside.”

Yet time for outdoor exploration is more difficult to come by these days, especially during school hours. One reason is that many boards of education responded to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 by eliminating social studies, science and recess from curricula. Teachers focused instead on the skills prominent in standardized tests — reading and math — even though research shows that exposure to the natural world helps students develop critical thinking and social skills, and boosts achievement.   In an effort to restore physical activity to the classroom and repair the schism between school performance and environmental education, U.S. Rep. John Sarbanes of Maryland authored the 2007 No Child Left Inside Act, which he reintroduced to Congress on April 22, Earth Day.   If passed, the bill would provide $100 million a year to support environmental education in public schools around the country. It would help train teachers to understand environmental issues, like climate change and water shortages, offer field trips for students, and build capacity within states for increases in both quality and quantity of environmental education curricula. The bill also encourages environmental professionals to teach environmental education.   “The ultimate goal is for the bill to be incorporated into the re-authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act [the overarching federal law that funds primary and secondary education] so that environmental education becomes a formal part of the education system,” says Sarbanes, who’s been involved in resource conservation and wildlife preservation in his home state for years.   Getting children outside may seem like a simple notion, but the implications are vast, adds Brian A. Day, director of the North American Association for Environmental Education, who says that when children become more Earth-savvy, they’re better prepared to make wise individual and societal choices.   “In the coming decades, we are going to have to make all kinds of important environmental decisions to do with energy, climate change, green jobs and green economy,” Day says. “If people have a real understanding of how our social and natural systems interact, then they’re in a position to be able to participate in a realistic way in lifestyle decisions, like which type of light bulb to use, what kind of car to drive, or larger policy decisions.”   Day isn’t alone in his enthusiasm for the bill’s foresight. His association is but one of the 1,000-member No Child Left Inside Coalition, an advocacy group created to help encourage kids to learn about the environment and promote the bill. Supporters hail from all 50 states and range from parent groups and environmental organizations to nature centers and education associations. In other words, an avalanche of support is building.   Last September, the U.S. House of Representatives readily passed the NCLIA with a vote of 298 to 109. It was reintroduced to Congress this spring since it never reached the Senate floor. On June 4 it was referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education. In the meantime, the NCLI Coalition hopes to continue garnering support. So too does Sarbanes, who’s appealing to members of Congress, as well as the public, for backing.   “We feel very positive about the bill,” Sarbanes says. “We ended last Congress with about 70 members of Congress as sponsors, and this time around we have members who are already familiar with the work of NCLIA. We would love the bill to go to the floor and say there are 50 states that already have environmental programs in place. And now the federal government needs to catch up and head in that direction.”