SCIENCEAFRICA:A MESSAGE TO THE G8 SUMMIT

[STOIC]

Science & Africa: A message to the G8 summit

Top of pageAbstractAfrica's scientists tell industrialized nations what they need to hear.

 

When the G8 leaders meet in Scotland next week to discuss how to help Africa's poorest nations, they are unlikely to hear the chants of the protestors — an 8-kilometre fence around their luxury hotel will see to that. But the activists have, to some extent, already been listened to: a debt-relief package has been signed by the group of eight industrialized countries and a hike in aid is also on the cards. But when it comes to spending this extra money, one question is whether the voices of Africa's scientists will be heeded.

 

On the following three pages, Nature presents those voices. They need to be heard, as science and technology are more of a priority for aid agencies than ever before. African universities, for example, are the subject of a new focus by the World Bank. Africa's leaders have also singled out science and technology in their continent-wide political strategy — the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD).

 

The comments that follow make for challenging reading. Every area seems to require immediate attention, from disease and climate change to a lack of access to education and sanitation. But themes emerge nonetheless. Solutions must factor in the needs of local communities and environments. Projects should be run as far as possible by Africans, not the donors. And Africa needs long-term backing from rich nations, not an uncertain future in which aid waxes and wanes. If science and technology projects are to help shape Africa, these are the strategies that should shape them.

 

 

 

South Africa: John Mugabe

Adviser on science and technology to NEPAD, based in Pretoria. Helped to establish the partnership's African Forum on Science and Technology for Development (AFSTD).

 

I spend most of my time working with governments and donors to ensure that scientific knowledge is incorporated into African skill sets, policies and strategies. We need more capacity for African countries to apply science to their problems, focusing on health, water, agriculture and the environment, and to generally increase economic competitiveness.

 

A big part of this will be technological innovation. You can never say when you have 'enough' technologies. There are many technologies available to manage water supply, for example, but few to improve water quality.

 

The hope of every country in the world is to have more scientists. But for us in Africa it is difficult. There is not just the task of training more scientists, we also need to create solid institutions and ensure that our scientists have specific, well-resourced projects to work on.

 

Debt relief will help, but developed countries need to ensure that the money is going to benefit productivity in Africa. Knowledge needs to be shared better between developed countries and Africa, to enable African countries to improve their technologies.

 

But in the short term, we want to see a commitment from the G8 to put together an African science fund that would be available to countries on a fairly flexible basis to address their problems — not necessarily without certain minimum conditions. That will be a better way for African scientists to get the relatively small amounts of money they need to work on projects that will benefit Africa.

 

 

 

Kenya: Kevin Marsh

Epidemiologist and director of the Wellcome Research Programme at the Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kilifi.

 

Despite receiving 30 years' worth of aid to develop medical science, Africa simply hasn't managed to build up a high-quality research network. Outside South Africa, there are probably fewer than a dozen health researchers with a high international profile, actively driving big, imaginative programmes that draw in substantial funding and scientific interest from around the world.

 

Nothing will change until research initiatives start coming from within African research centres. Without an established career structure, it is hard to get that critical mass of expertise. Because there is no research culture at many African universities, people do not see science as an attractive option. And once trained, the best African scientists are often attracted abroad. If you want good scientists in Africa, you need to pay them.

 

A continent-wide group is putting together a detailed plan for developing medical science in Africa. We hope to discuss these proposals with the UK government in the next few weeks. We need to develop training programmes and set up collaborative research links across Africa and abroad, rooted in African health problems. We can start by focusing on the African research centres that are already doing world-class research. We need to turn them into engines for training home-grown PhDs and postdocs, and they can also play a critical role as the nodes of an African research network.

 

The G8 nations should act on the Commission for Africa report drawn up in March, committing up to US$3 billion over 10 years for African centres of excellence in science and technology. Of that funding, US$900 million should go towards developing a vibrant research network that links these centres.

 

 

 

Rwanda: Romain Murenzi

Rwandan minister of education, science, technology and scientific research. Previously a professor of theoretical physics at Clark Atlanta University in the United States.

 

Ten years after its gruesome civil war, Rwanda is still widely associated with the second-worst genocide of the twentieth century: the conflict between the Hutus and the Tutsis that killed 800,000 people in just 100 days. Less widely known are Rwanda's serious attempts to promote science, technology and education as a means to combat poverty, backwardness and conflict.

 

Since the war, the number of people being trained in Rwanda to degree level in science has increased eightfold. And 25,000 students are enrolled at the National University of Rwanda and other higher-education institutes. By 2020, we hope that about 100,000 Rwandans — around 1% of the rapidly rising population — will have a higher academic qualification. And attempts to interest Rwanda's young generation in science will start early. From next year, all the country's 2,200 primary schools will be equipped with 'science corners', displaying basic information about the Sun and the planets, the cycle of life, or a map of the world — plus a computer with an Internet connection.

 

Scientists and engineers will find plenty to tackle in Rwanda, from soil erosion to water management, health, biodiversity and ecosystem conservation. But one particular problem is that there are not enough science teachers, as many were denounced by their colleagues and killed during the civil war.

 

The horrible conflict was partly rooted in academic circles: some intellectuals sowed the ethnic hatred that led to the genocide. It is now crucial that Rwanda creates an education system that rewards merit, rather than ethnicity. Such a system can become a model for the reconciliation of Rwandan society.

 

Rwanda must create an education system that rewards merit, rather than ethnicity.

To this end, an ambitious national science, technology and innovation project was launched at a conference in May, supported by science-policy experts from Australia, Britain, Sweden and the United States. It aims to give children and young people access to basic and higher education, to strengthen human rights and peace education, and to eventually transform the country into a knowledge-based economy. The Rwandan government has requested US$130 million from the African Development Bank for the programme. Additional support from the G8 countries is both necessary and very welcome.

 

 

 

Mozambique: Pascoal Mocumbi

Prime minister of Mozambique from 1994 to February 2004. Now high representative of the European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership programme.

 

Decisions taken at the G8 summit will be important in building the strong science and technology base that Africa needs, particularly for developing the tools needed to control disease. The major killers are causing devastation in Africa. In my own country, Mozambique, one in four children dies before the age of five, and malaria is the biggest cause. What is lacking at the international level is an understanding of the importance of research and development, particularly within Africa, in the fight against disease.

 

Much can be done to fight malaria with existing tools. But we need more effective drugs, and we need a vaccine. We need research and clinical trials in Africa. On vaccines there is light at the end of the tunnel — the number of candidate vaccines is growing. But the G8 needs to push for a more coordinated effort. We need a new international malaria vaccine enterprise, drawing, for example, on the work of the Malaria Vaccine Technology Roadmap, a project in which I am involved.

 

The G8 must also address infrastructure, particularly for health research. Things are much better than they were ten years ago. African countries now have their own draft strategy for science and technology, drawn up by the AFSTD (established by NEPAD) to promote their economies and reduce poverty. The G8 must build on this to achieve sustained progress. Debt relief is an important decision, and African countries must plough some of this money into science, technology and health, where it could make a big difference.

 

Education is a key plank: we need nothing less than a comprehensive system from primary school to higher education. Another is telecommunications. The Internet is already revolutionizing African research, but bandwidth remains too slow and expensive.

 

But most important, the G8 must urgently respond to the call from Africans for a flow of predictable funding to support NEPAD's strategy. We need to think at the country level; change will only come when the leadership of the country is in the driving seat. Take the UN Millennium goals to slash poverty and diseases. Unless these are tackled at the country level, we will simply continue to have more talks, more meetings, and little progress.

 

 

 

Nigeria: Anthony Nyong

Expert on environmental resources and natural hazards at the University of Jos.

 

Poverty is a major cause of environmental degradation and causes people to live unsustainably. Take deforestation: people who cut down trees don't do it for fun: it is a bid to survive. Much of the rural population depends on wood as fuel for domestic energy and cooking.

 

Faced with the need to survive, people even have to encroach on protected forests and game reserves. It is unfair and impractical to think that force can prevent this. Africans need appropriate science and technology to develop cheap and affordable energy sources.

 

Climate change is likely to make matters worse: major international reports conclude that Africa is the most vulnerable continent. A first step towards reducing this vulnerability is to assess the potential impacts of climate change. But most African nations have neither the capacity nor the technical ability to do this. The few studies that do look at Africa have largely been conducted by Western scientists. Africans need to build scientific capacity so that we can develop our own models, validated over Africa.

 

Africans also need science and technology to help adapt to predicted changes — to develop affordable, accessible and sustainable tools, such as early warning systems, drought-resistant crops, water-extracting and harvesting systems, and flood-protection.

 

It is time to stop the 'mercenary' form of development that has long been practised. Africa does not need food aid that continually impoverishes its own people. We need to enable farmers to grow their own food in the face of environmental challenges.

 

 

 

South Africa: Mike Jensen

Telecommunications consultant working with NEPAD and international agencies, and an expert on African Internet connectivity.

 

Improving Internet connections for research centres and hospitals in Africa would be one of the most cost-effective actions the G8 could take. It would empower African scientists and medical researchers by giving them high-speed access to the wealth of information and vast scientific databases available on the Web.

 

Although some African countries have high-speed Internet connections, Africa lags far behind the rest of the world. The root problem is that telecoms in Africa are national monopolies. High-speed Internet connections usually have to go through the national operator, and bandwidth costs 10 to 100 times more than in Europe or North America.

 

The G8 should encourage liberalization of these markets. Meanwhile, the international community should subsidize national research networks directly. The European Union has already connected North African countries to Europe's research network. And the provision of high-speed satellite links to malaria research centres has shown how the Internet can boost productivity and cooperation.

 

Research centres and networks need to band together to increase their bargaining power in negotiations over bandwidth costs. The G8 should support such initiatives, including NEPAD's plan to create a network of optical fibre cables across Africa. It should support the Indian government's project to fund a satellite for educational purposes for the African Union. And it could address the lack of computing infrastructure and human resources in scientific research centres.

 

But we have to start somewhere: the creation of Internet-connected research centres in universities and hospitals would be a good place.

 

 

 

Kenya: Florence Wambugu

CEO of A Harvest Biotech Foundation International, a Kenyan organization dedicated to promoting sustainable agriculture through the use of biotechnology.

 

We cannot develop Africa without biotechnology. Enormous numbers of people suffer from malnutrition in some regions, and this is where biotechnology has huge potential.

 

One example is NERICA (New Rice for Africa), a variety developed by the West Africa Rice Development Association in Bouaké, Ivory Coast. The rice was created by conventional breeding and combines high-yield Asian strains with drought-resistant African ones. It is a good example of the research and development we can do when there is partnership between scientists in Africa and abroad.

 

But we have to take a holistic approach — we also need to address other issues such as soil fertility, water management, human infrastructure and capacity development.

 

The problem is that there is a disconnect between high-level international research and the perspectives and priorities of African leaders. Most research here is donor-funded. There is an urgent need for African countries to fund their own research so that they have a stake in the results. That way the results will be more relevant and can be linked to local communities.

 

Involving rural people is crucial. The poverty in Africa is in the villages. We need education and training for farmers so that they can make use of opportunities such as improved seed banks. That will empower them. You can't just give them an agricultural innovation and leave them to it. I believe in science and technology, but the way it is implemented is very important.

 

For example, genetically modified (GM) crops have a major role to play in Africa, especially in tackling problems such as pests, drought and malnutrition. To succeed, GM technology must be implemented in a way that gives Africans true ownership. Although there is room for many different players, including the private sector, researchers and agricultural organizations, greater emphasis should be placed on collaborations with countries outside Africa. When it comes to staple crops, the possibility of royalty-free technologies must also be explored.

 

 

 

Ghana: Fred Binka

Head of epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Ghana, and executive director of the INDEPTH pan-African network of field epidemiological centres.

 

If the G8 summit is really to improve the lot of Africa, it must make a big commitment to controlling infectious diseases, particularly the three big killers: AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis. Without this, all other efforts to raise Africa out of poverty will be futile. That is because, although it's accepted that poverty causes disease, it is too often overlooked that disease causes poverty. AIDS is destroying African economies and workforces, and malaria, my own field of work, is estimated to slow African economies by 1.3% a year — crippling the poorest households and workers.

 

Plans for debt relief, easing of trade barriers and new development funds will be good news for Africa. But these measures address just one side of the problem — poverty. If we do not also tackle health we will just continue in a vicious circle, where disease breeds poverty, which breeds disease.

 

Without controlling infectious diseases, all other efforts to raise Africa out of poverty will be futile.

The Commission for Africa report mentions health research, but it is vague. The fact is that malaria is right here to be controlled. The situation is getting better, and more money is flowing in. But even the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria is still supporting fragmented efforts; it is not taking the bull by the horns.

 

What the G8 needs to advocate is much wider use of current intervention tools. We need to be putting 50 million bednets a year into Africa and we need to scale up drugs and house-spraying to cover entire countries. Zambia recently pledged to do this and aims to cut mortality by 75% in three years. When I first heard this I was really excited — I'm not joking; if the G8 backs and helps fund that approach across the continent, we will reduce the malaria burden dramatically.

 

To create major change we need African-led efforts, supported by the international community. I think the message is also getting through to the G8 that we need research, and that we cannot do this without scientists, trained and working in Africa. The G8 must make a strong commitment to building human capacity, and this must not be lip-service.

 

 

 

South Africa: Mark Henning

Chair of South Africa's Sector Education and Training Authority.

 

Education is vital. All sorts of studies say that the best thing African countries can do is to have universal primary education, including bringing girls into schools. That should be a priority. It's always been assumed in Africa that if you get a university degree your future is secure, but if you don't, then life holds nothing. That's false. We need to find a balance between providing high-quality specialized education and uplifting the poorly educated majority.

 

The relationship between education and economic growth is complex. Economic success depends on many things other than education, and it has to be the right education for the right people. Zimbabweans are well educated, for example, but the country's disastrous economic policies mean that people are starving.

 

Malaria and HIV/AIDS are huge problems too. Where you have family groups headed by ten-year-old children, it has a profound effect on education. Financial support and development of drugs by the G8 can make a big difference.

 

It's got to be the right education for the right people.

Youth unemployment is a time bomb — well over 60% in South Africa. 'Trade not aid' is a critical slogan. The G8 needs to free up trade in a way that will let African nations stop relying on aid. With 60 undernourished children in a class it's hard to make progress. And don't forget the cancer of corruption — a lot of that is coming from G8 countries, whose entrepreneurs are buying favours. Fix these problems, and maybe educational reforms can deliver.

 

 

 

Sierra Leone: Ogunlade Davidson

Professor of mechanical engineering and energy systems at the University of Sierra Leone in Freetown, and co-chair of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

 

Development in Africa will need energy. A Latin-American household consumes 3.5 times more energy than a sub-Saharan one, and North Americans consume 22 times as much energy as we do. Almost 75% of energy in Africa is consumed by South Africa and six North African countries — the other 46 countries account for a mere quarter of consumption. Sub-Saharan countries will demand substantial amounts of extra energy in the next decades.

 

In theory, Africa has abundant energy resources — oil, gas, coal and hydropower, depending on the region— to meet the increased demand. But enough energy does not reach consumers, and the quality of refineries and fuel products is often poor. Two thirds of the gas obtained as a by-product of oil production is wasted, because producers claim there is no demand for it. Here is a case for the G8 countries to put pressure on the big oil companies, because African governments are too weak to urge them to invest in new and more energy-efficient infrastructure and in power systems that use gas.

 

The G8 countries must put pressure on the big oil companies to invest in new and more energy-efficient infrastructure.

Climate change is also a key issue, because although Africa contributes least to greenhouse gas concentrations, it is most vulnerable to global warming. Malaria, sea-level rise, droughts and other impacts on rain-fed agriculture are some of the most difficult problems facing the continent. Rainfall has decreased substantially since 1900, which can partly be attributed to global warming. And air pollution from antiquated coal plants and cooking fires is a widespread problem in countries such as Zimbabwe and South Africa.

 

For all these reasons, it is essential that Africa's growing hunger for energy is satisfied by clean and environmentally friendly means. The rich countries should help by promoting advanced production of renewable energy, such as from biomass.

 

 

 

Interviews by Peter Aldhous, Declan Butler, Jim Giles, Michael Hopkin, Mark Peplow and Quirin Schiermeier

 

Top of pageSOURCES

[Valenteenah.]

G8 leaders agree $50bn aid boost

 

The G8 summit has ended with an agreement to boost aid for developing countries by $50bn (£28.8bn).

 

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair said there was also a commitment to find an end date for farm subsidies and a will to find agreement on trade liberalisation.

 

On climate change, he said an agreement had always been unlikely, but crucially the US had accepted that global warming was an issue.

 

NGOs are critical of the deal, calling it a "vastly disappointing result".

 

"The people have roared but the G8 has whispered," said Kumi Naidoo, chair of the Global Call to Action against Poverty.

 

 

'Progress'

 

But Live 8 organiser Bob Geldof spoke of a "great day".

 

"Never before have so many people forced a change of policy onto a global agenda. If anyone had said eight weeks ago will we get a doubling of aid, will we get a deal on debt, people would have said 'no'," Mr Geldof said.

 

He added that he gave the G8 summit "10 out of 10 on aid, eight out of 10 on debt".

 

Irish rock star and fellow anti-poverty campaigner Bono, praised the agreement to give universal access to Aids drugs.

 

"600,000 Africans, mostly children, will remember this G8 submit at Gleneagles because they will be around to remember this summit, and they wouldn't have otherwise," said Bono.

 

Key points:

 

* Mr Blair said trade discussions in Hong Kong later this year should yield an end date to agricultural subsidies.

* Britain is to host a 1 November meeting on climate change, to assess progress.

* Mr Blair said "only people who can change Africa ultimately are the Africans".

* $3bn agreed for Palestinian Authority for investment in infrastructure.

* Nigeria's President Olusegun Obasanjo described the deal as a "success".

* G8 commits to training 20,000 peacekeepers for Africa.

* African leaders to commit to democracy and good governance as part of the deal.

* Debts of the 18 poorest countries to be forgiven.

 

Summing up the G8 meeting, Mr Blair acknowledged: "It isn't all everyone wanted, but it is progress."

 

On climate change, Mr Blair said: "If it is impossible to bring America into the consensus on tackling the issue... we will never ensure the huge emerging economies, who are going to consume more energy than any other part of the world... are part of the dialogue."

 

He said however that agreement had been reached that climate change was a problem, human activity contributed to it and it had to be tackled with urgency.

 

'Face of death'

 

Earlier the prime minister had said that in the wake of Thursday's attacks, the communique was the "definitive expression of our collective will to act in the face of death".

 

"It has a pride and a hope and a humanity that can lift the shadow of terrorism," he added.

 

Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) remained critical of the G8 deal.

 

Some described the talks on climate change as a "significant lost opportunity".

 

G8 leaders have indicated the statement represents progress but Stephen Tindale, a spokesperson for Greenpeace, said: "The G8 has committed to nothing new but at least we haven't moved backwards on the environment."

 

The Sustainable Energy and Economy Network, a worldwide coalition of environmental and development campaigners, said: "Urgent action is now required to substantially reduce emissions, reduce fossil fuel dependence and to protect people around the world, especially the vulnerable, the poor and disappearing nations."

 

Source

[Valenteenah.]

G8 SUMMIT RESULTS

• Stalemate on climate change as US position barely budges

• G8 nations agree to full debt cancellation for 18 countries, while African countries call for debt relief for all Africa

• EU members pledge to reach a collective aid target of 0.56% of GDP by 2010, and 0.7% by 2015

• The G8 agrees a $50bn (£28.8bn) boost to aid
  A ' signal' for a new deal on trade

Nothing on climate change. A 'signal' for deal on trade (meaning 'not on your life'). £28.8bn is pretty much nothing in terms of aid (divide it by 53, then take away half :rolleyes: ). And a weak pledge to reach the 0.7% of GDP target in 10 years time. What a bloody waste of time. :mad:

[Castro]

Nothing on climate change.

Dubya still has difficulty understanding how ground level ozone manages to stuff 3 Oxygen atoms in one molecule. So he declined to sign on.

 

A 'signal' for deal on trade (meaning 'not on your life'). £28.8bn is pretty much nothing in terms of aid (divide it by 53, then take away half :rolleyes: ).

Nuff said. And very well said.

 

And a weak pledge to reach the 0.7% of GDP target in 10 years time. What a bloody waste of time. :mad:

I was gonna say G8 and similar hangouts are photo ops but I remembered they're more than that. They are actually where the new world order is designed and implemented. The "help the third world" thing is just marketing. No substance.

 

Ofleh doesn't look dissapointed but actually mad for thinking that it would actually be different this year.

[Viking]

Zeph,

This meeting has been a failure, no matter how Geldof and Bono view it. Out of the $50 billion pledged, only about 15 Billion is new, the rest is money they had pledged earlier but not given out.

 

The most important thing they could have done in this summit to help alleviate poverty is fair trade. The issue of subsidies on export products and tarrifs has not even been discussed. CAP et al are still in place which means that their surplus will continue to be dumped on the African market and more lives will be ruined. :mad:

[Rahima]

What a bloody waste of time.

As i thought would be the case. I'm not really suprised and i don't think these people really care.

 

Africans need to do something for themselves to alleviate their problems rather then waiting for the help of others.

[Valenteenah.]

Viking,

 

Absolutely. This summit has been a disgrace. I don't see what Bob Geldof is so happy about, considering the fact that he has travelled through all those countries and actually saw first-hand the need and urgency for action NOW...not in 5 or 10 year's time.

 

 

The $3bn aid package pledged to Palestinians is great news, but...and this is a big BUT, it is nothing compared to US aid to Israel.

 

 

Rahima,

 

The onus is on Africans, I agree, but they can't do it without assistance. A bird with clipped wings cannot fly on its own.

[Rahima]

^Granted, but I believe the forerunners in such events should be Africans not rich white men living lush lives in the west, and although they may have the best of intentions I think it is given a better face when the face is black and living amongst it all.

 

I personally don’t see how any more aid is going to do anything, just wipe off the debt (or cease it from increasing) and bring in fair trade, for Africans as a people are hard workers, unfortunately our leaders who receive all the aid are corrupt scumbags.

[STOIC]

This was better than nothing, but what really disapointed me was about the agricultural subsidies.The G8 agreed to tackle this problem but with no strict timetable!.Why is the agricultural subsidies a big deal?-Currently the USA and European countries spend about US$ 279 billion subsidizing their farmers.This subsidies are disastrous to the poor African farmer who can not export his produce to the global market.When twenty or thirty percent of an American farmer or European farmer income is subsidized by the government-this creates a uneven playing field for the African farmer to compete!.

Under "Bush Wack " leadership American has been in denial that it is the emission of carbon dioxide that contribute to the problem of global warming-even my younger cousin undestands that if you leave a chocolate in your car on a sunny day it will melt immediately!.Bush doesn't understand that the widnshield glass that was supposed to protect the penetration of the heat is like having an ozone hole in the stratosphere. Carbon dioxide and green house gases becomes a precursor for the formation of ozone-hence creating an ozone hole.Bush clings to the claim that that global warming theory is just an unapproved theory as a way to justify his stance-it does not demand governmental action or regulations.Thanks to Blair for making Bush to accept the truth.

 

PS i hope Londernistans had a good weekend!

[shyhem]

Originally posted by STOIC:

Bush clings to the claim that that global warming theory is just an unapproved theory as a way to justify his stance-it does not demand governmental action or regulations.Thanks to Blair for making Bush to accept the truth.

 

Not exactly,America is concerned about the economic consequences of Kyoto protocol than what u just said.I think you're confusing bush with Exxon Mobil who hired enviromental Scientist to disapprove the global warming theory.

 

Saxib don't be so exicited about the whole enviroment this and enviroment that theories. The rules they are advocating for will definately cost us jobs and in the long run make most American companies less competitive in the market and that is bad news for the Xalimo working in the assembly line.

 

The Chinese are the second biggest source of pullution after US and yet there is not enough pressure on them to tackle this problem.

 

I don't think Americans are ready to lose their jobs over acrap like the enviroment.Who needs the enviroment when you ain't got no job and still have bills to pay.

[Sky]

I believe the forerunners in such events should be Africans not rich white men living lush lives in the west, and although they may have the best of intentions I think it is given a better face when the face is black and living amongst it all.

True, Oprah Winfrey would do a heck of a better job than Bob Geldof. People practically worship her in the west, whereas Geldof is virtually unknown. Oprah has more funds and the network to make a change, whereas Geldof only has 1985 to cling on. And most importantly Oprah is black and Geldof is awfully white.

 

Why is the agricultural subsidies a big deal?-Currently the USA and European countries spend about US$ 279 billion subsidizing their farmers.This subsidies are disastrous to the poor African farmer who can not export his produce to the global market.When twenty or thirty percent of an American farmer or European farmer income is subsidized by the government-this creates a uneven playing field for the African farmer to compete!.

The West would rather give trillions of dollars at once to Africa than to reform a single part of their trade policies and regulation. Why? Because reforming trade means for them losing their much needed power, now they cannot blatantly colonise the rest of the world anymore. Without this power, they are nothing. Fair trade will never come to us on a silver platter. We just have to get out there and take it. Unite as Africa and join forces with China, India, Brazil etc.

[STOIC]

Aha...my men!.In the political world the ice is melting.The world is realising that the global warming is real and that mankind is contributing to the destruction of our planet.Since early 80's scientists have been predicting that global tempreture would rise and we have witnessed that!.According to NASA the four warmest years are 1998,2002,2003,and 2004.Also scientist have predicted that the world will experience floods and storms-you will see this if you been watching lately hurricane Dennis which flooded homes and swept roofs along the Pensacolla beach.Now my freind i do understand that there is the politics of economic that plays a role in Bush decision.My freind when the last tree is washed by the flood and the last fish is dead we will realise that we can not eat money!.My freind we as a humanbeings can manipulate and improve nature through reason by means of science and technology.If science predict something and we experience the result,don't we act on it?.

[STOIC]

G8 climate plan 'lacks bite'

Michael Hopkin

Industrial nations knocked for failing to agree firm course of action.

Applause for British Prime Minister Tony Blair at the conclusion of the G8 summit.

World leaders attending the G8 summit in Britain have released their eagerly awaited statement on climate change, agreeing that the issue is a "serious long-term challenge". But environmental groups have criticized their plan, saying that it lacks firm targets and timetables for action.

 

The group of eight industrialized nations' official position on climate change calls for "resolve and urgency" in cutting emissions of greenhouse gases. But although seven members reaffirmed their commitment to the Kyoto Protocol, which puts fixed targets on reducing emissions, the US president George W. Bush has maintained his opposition to it.

 

The issuing of the report tops a hard week for the British prime minister Tony Blair, who headed back to London on 7 July to help address the terrorist attack on the city. More than 50 people died following bombs that went off on the underground subways and a bus.

 

Technological solution?

 

The G8 leaders agree that investment in clean-energy technologies is important. Their statement says that some US$16 trillion of investment will be required over the coming 25 years, a period during which the world's energy demands will increase by 60%, mostly in burgeoning economies such as India and China.

 

While uncertainty remains in our understanding of climate science, we know enough to act now.

 

G8 leaders

 

Possible technologies that could be deployed to combat greenhouse-gas emissions include alternative power sources such as the Sun, wind, water and nuclear fission or fusion. Perhaps the biggest challenge will be to equip developing nations with the technology to burn fossil fuels more cleanly, for example, by 'scrubbing' carbon dioxide from coal-fired power plants.

 

But the summit has failed to agree on a timetable for such investment, environmental groups point out. "It's well nuanced but there's no real action," says Mark Kenber, policy director for The Climate Group, a think-tank based in Surrey, UK.

 

The leaders acknowledged that global warming has been caused, in large part, by human activities. The statement adds: "While uncertainty remains in our understanding of climate science, we know enough to act now."

 

Beyond Kyoto

 

The statement also argues that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, of which the Kyoto Protocol is part, remains the best way forwards for tackling the issue.

 

All G8 countries, including the United States, agreed that the overarching convention provides the appropriate framework for research into the issue. Many observers say this is not enough.

 

"The Bush administration has again done its best to derail international action to tackle climate change, but this is by no means the end," says Tony Juniper, vice-chairman of the pressure group Friends of the Earth International, headquartered in the Netherlands. "There are many good initiatives happening in the United States to tackle climate change and it is only a matter of time before the president will have to follow suit."Lord May, president of the Royal Society, Britain's premier scientific academic body, says: "At the heart of this communiqué is a disappointing failure by the leaders of the G8 unequivocally to recognize the urgency with which we must be addressing the global threat of climate change."Blair has called for the G8 nations to reassemble in November to continue discussing climate change. And Russia, which will hold the G8 presidency next year, has pledged to put the issue at the top of its agenda

Sources

 

PS:Warya, SomericaN Stop listening to the likes of Rush Limbaugh!