That’s a great summmary of the discussions in Nairobi.

I was reading a paper in the awesome compilation “Reclaiming Africa” by James Shikwati, that refered to the environment movement as similar (and even as powerful) to the Christian evangelical movemnts that came that so to the spread of Christianity. The author (I do not recal his name) went on to compare the language used by the evangelical movement to that used by the environment movement’s agents; words or phrases like “saving” the environment, building. He went on to describe “environmentalism” as the “new religion” that came in to fill the vaccum left by the socio-economic ideologies propagated by Karl Marx, Comte, and others.

In a another paper in the same book a section that covers the history of National Parks in Africa and the marginalization of indigeneous peoples that occupied those “parks” (before they were parks) in an effort to preserve a pristine untouched “Eden”, with little regard for the said indigenous peoples opinion or input.

In your write-up above you mention the reluctance of the “developed nations” to support activities that would enable the “developing nations” adjust to inevitable climate change. (Q.) Do you see a link/rather a contradiction between what I have mentioned above and the “developing nations” stance?

I have often heard WHO (World Health Organization) and KEMRI (Kenya Medical Research Institute) that Malaria – the leading killer in Africa is a climate prone disease (not AIDS or Tuberculosis); with areas in Kenya and other African countries that previously did not have any record of Malaria cases, now having some- the reason being the climate change pattern graduating towards warmer temperatures. (Q.) Was there any mention, at the Nairobi talks, of “Technological Transfer” to cope with Malaria in Africa, or perhaps provide more support to efforts already on the ground by Africans themselves, to tackle the spread of Malaria as was the case in Europe and the North American countries over 40 years ago?

I look forward to your resopnse.

Regards,
Specioza.

Generation Kyoto
Garry Thomas
Mar 2, 2007
Positive News Issue

Half way through the UN Climate Change Conference, held in Nairobi from November 6-17, Dr. Joseph Ouma Muga, a 70 year old Kenyan professor of geology and environmental studies, stood up in a meeting and said, “This is one of the best days of my life.”

Dr. Muga was not speaking of the plenary sessions where over 6,000 delegates from more than 180 countries were debating the science and economics of climate change, emission- reduction proposals, carbon finance, and after Kyoto what? He was praising the energy, creativity, and intelligence of the only youth panel at the conference, “Generation Kyoto: Youth-led Climate Change Action from Local to Global.” The panelists, from Canada, India, Togo, Costa Rica and the Netherlands, were brought to
Nairobi by organizations such as Greenpeace and Solar Generation International.

UN climate change conferences have been held annually for 12 years now, and are best known for having negotiated the Kyoto Protocols in 1997. One hundred sixty six nations have now signed on, pledging to reduce their greenhouse gases collectively by 5% as compared to the baseline year of 1990. Elegant calls to urgent action came from two Nobel Peace Prize laureates, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and Wangari Maathai, and the authoritative voice of Sir Nicholas Stern of “The Stern Report” fame.

Though few agreements were made at the conference, the fact that representatives from 180 countries could carry out such serious business or that the UN can function at all during such trying times in such a vulnerable part of the world is still a marvel of modern times. It was inspiring that young people from around the world could have both hope and such a good presence at the Nairobi meetings. And there is some reason to believe that this year’s conference did lay some good groundwork for global action, thanks in part to the contributions of Generation Kyoto.

Nice web page! I tried to send you this fluffy little piece I did for Positive News (oddly enough, they wanted news with a positive spin to it!), using your Sierra Youth Coalition address, but the kindly postmaster returned my e-mail:

http://www.positivenews.org.uk/artman/publish/article_1106.shtml

Maybe I’ll have more luck with this site? Please let me know.

Maybe you have the addresses for Golam, Sena, Micah, the young man from Beijing, the women from Uganda, Kenya, Switzerland and France, etc., and could forward this to them as well.

Could you send me the name and contact information for the fellow from China, pictured here?

Many thanks.

All the best,

Garry Thomas

thomasg@ithaca.edu

Allow me to clarify…

This is specifically with reference to discussions within the subject of Technology Transfer; essentially developing countries wanted to change the way technology transfer is handled in order to secure more money- but developed countries didn’t budge.

A decision was deferred to next May’s mid-year meeting to see if at least a draft decision could go to the conference next year. This is a critical issue for developing countries and whatever the final mandate is that’s agreed on in the next year or two.

In other areas of aid, not specifically related to transferring technology, there has been a fabulous response from developed countries to helping developed countries – so this one mis-hap is not meant to be misleading!!

A positive press release from the UN on climate aid from developed to developing countries to adapt to climate effects can be read here in the News section.

[This blog is] recommended.

You say:

• Developed countries refused to give funds to developing countries for new sustainable technologies.

I find it inconceivable that this could be the case — could you give some reasons as to why developed countries would refuse to give funds for something so important? Yes, it is no doubt bureaucratic decisionmaking, but do you know their rationale?

[This blog is] highly recommended.