Connect with us

Economics

We Will Survive the Coronavirus. Will We Survive Ourselves?

Published

on

People everywhere have shown extraordinary innovation in forging practical, socially and ecologically sensitive solutions to everyday needs, across the world. Now it’s up to the rest of us to heed the warnings, resist injustice, undermine the systems of oppression, and learn from the pluriverse of alternatives already available. The coronavirus has handed us a great opportunity to move towards such a radical ecological democracy.

 by Ashish Kothari, Courtesy, Local Futures

What an astonishing slap in humanity’s face, this coronavirus. But the silver lining is that it is also a rude wake up call. I say ‘silver lining’, for at the centre of this is a massive humanitarian crisis of illnesses and deaths –  and for working classes who cannot switch to ‘online’ work, whose workplaces are shut and who unlike their bosses do not have wealth to fall back on. The COVID-19 pandemic has generated historically unprecedented global action, partly because it has hit the rich and brought the global economy to its knees, but like always, the ‘poor’ are paying a higher price.

And yet, we have been handed an incredible opportunity to right many historic wrongs. These relate to how we have treated our earthly home, and each other as humans … and the two are connected.

Images of cleaner, less crowded cities, and news of the drop in pollution and carbon emission levels are being flashed worldwide, as ground and air mobility plummets. Likewise wildlife must be breathing a bit easier as industrial-scale fishing and hunting reduce. In The Swarm by Frank Schätzing, deep sea micro-organisms with collective intelligence wreak mass scale revenge on humanity for its complete ecological disregard. Who knows if viruses are not doing precisely the same thing? Why should we think only human beings have agency, and the rest of nature is a mute bystander?

But even if the message of the viruses is not consciously generated, we should  heed it: the earth cannot take any more abuse. Massive extraction of minerals and oil, humongous infrastructure slashing across landscapes, and industrial levels of natural resource use (hunting for the global market, monocultural commercial agriculture and fisheries), have disrupted natural systems irreversibly. The fatal consequences for the livelihoods of billions people, for humanity as a whole, and for countless other species, is starkly visible; but also clear now is how this is unleashing micro-organisms that were not earlier affecting human beings, but now are latching on to us as new hosts.

We have let the forces of capitalism, state-domination and patriarchy run amok. The ever-growing chasm between the rich and the poor allows the elite to run for their well-stocked nuclear bunkers, hoping they can escape the virus, while half of humanity wonders how it will get its next meal if it can’t earn its daily wage to buy it.

The lack of accessible healthcare for millions in so-called ‘developed’ countries like the United States, where the pharmaceutical and medical industry has been profiting shamelessly, and the impunity of the fossil fuel and military-industrial complex (the Pentagon alone being the world’s biggest carbon emitter), is clearer than ever before. As an immediate response, we need urgent governmental and civil society steps for the most vulnerable, such as what the Working Peoples Charter has demanded of the Indian government. But simultaneously, we have to demand more fundamental, long-term change.

And so, here is the opportunity. We have the means to refashion the economy and polity, local to global, to be ecologically respectful and socially just. But this requires not simply some cosmetic managerial fixes, like bank bailouts after the 2008 economic collapse, nor technological fixes such as giant screens that will supposedly reduce global warming. These will not stop the periodic global crises that patriarchal capitalism and statism set us up for. No, it means systemic transformations that replace these structures with more equal political, economic, and social relations. We need a dramatic transformation towards genuine democracy, a swaraj that encompasses all of life.

From globalisation to open localisation

This means, firstly, a focus on reversing economic globalisation. This neo-liberal panacea promised to bring prosperity to all peoples, but instead brought enormous distress, growing inequality and ecological devastation. The integration of production, consumption and trade into complex global relations, has meant that no community or country is able to strive for self-reliance or to protect its own livelihoods and environment from damage by multinational corporations and unfair trade.

Along with this is the domination of one way of being and knowing (‘western’) over all others, colonialism onwards, and in an increasingly precarious world affecting even previously secure middle classes, an easy fallback to convenient scapegoats and rigid religiosity (‘those refugees and minorities are to blame’). Which partly explains the electoral swing to the right in so many countries.

But what will economic globalisation be replaced with? Open localisation, a process of striving for self-reliance in meeting basic needs (food, water, shelter, learning, health, governance, dignity, livelihoods) from within a certain human-scale local region, while continuing socio-cultural and some material relations across regions (especially global exchanges of cultures and knowledges on an equal plane).

In such a system, each of us in our local communities has a level of control over decision-making, and localised feedback loops bring ecological and social damage immediately to our notice. This is unlike in a globalised economy in which the damage of my over-consumption is borne by someone a thousand kilometres away. Such a system will significantly reduce the necessity of global movement of products and people, with much less chances of global pathogen spread. If this could revitalise the rural economy and society, it will also reduce – even reverse – the mass migration of people from rural areas into cities, which has resulted in densely packed populations where disease can spread so easily.

But is local self-reliance, and such revitalisation at community level, possible? Thousands of initiatives at food, energy, water, and other forms of community sovereignty across the world show that it indeed is. Most of these have succeeded despite adverse macro-economic and political contexts (e.g. organic farming within a system that promotes chemical agriculture), so imagine how much more they could spread if there were positive policy environments (e.g. in India, shifting billions of rupees of subsidy for chemical fertilisers to organic inputs).

Crucially, this would also entail a shift back to the real economy, focused on actual products and services, and not the crazy roller-coaster virtual economy of shares and derivatives on which a tiny minority of people have become immensely rich. It will bring back the importance of biocultural regions, defined by close, tangible social and ecological relationships. It will emphasise once again that instead of the privatisation of nature and natural resources (including land, water, forests, and even knowledge and ideas), we need to place these in the public domain, with democratic custodianship, as vividly demonstrated by the global commons movement. It will also have to press for a significant reduction in elite material and energy use, as argued convincingly by Europe’s degrowth movement.

This has to be accompanied by radical democracy, where people take political control in place-based collectives, rather than putting all their faith in elected parties; and by struggles for social justice and equity (on gender, caste, ethnicity and other fronts). This means there will be no place for the xenophobic ‘shut the borders’ call of racist and religiously bigoted right-wing forces. Civil society initiatives in many European countries have shown the possibility of localisation while welcoming refugees from war-torn areas. In the long run, of course, such conflict zones themselves need to become areas of peaceful localisation, as in the brave autonomy movement of Kurdish people (led by women) in the Syria-Iran-Iraq-Turkey border area. Both this and the Zapatista autonomy movement in Mexico show how communities can address multiple issues through local radical democracy. These also show the potential of redrawing political boundaries to be more sensitive to ecological and cultural contiguity, identity, and relations.

The Green New Deal of Bernie Sanders in the US and the Labour Party in the UK, despite some serious flaws, and the worker-led ‘one million climate jobs’ campaign in South Africa, demonstrate in earthy details how society can move towards justice and ecological sustainability.

The transformation also needs to encompass spiritual or ethical reconnection with the earth. Indigenous peoples and other communities who still live amidst natural ecosystems have long warned of the consequences of thinking that human beings are outside of nature, not bound by the limits and norms of the earth. In their movements, they have brought back a diversity of ways of being and knowing … buen vivir, ubuntu, sumac kawsay, kyosei, country, minobimaatasiiwin, swaraj, and many others … that speak of living with the earth and each other in harmony.

‘Ordinary’ people have shown extraordinary innovation in forging practical, socially and ecologically sensitive solutions to everyday needs, across the world. Now it’s up to the rest of us to heed the warnings, resist injustice, undermine the systems of oppression, and learn from the pluriverse of alternatives already available. The coronavirus has handed us a great opportunity to move towards such a radical ecological democracy.

This post originally appeared in The Wire.

 

 

Get Mobilized and Make Love Go Viral!
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Economics

Our Population Challenge Beyond Climate Change

Published

on

Do we plan for a secure and better life, or carry on blindly toward a minefield of lethal limits? 

 

By Brian McGavin, writer and environmentalist, is a director of Scientists Warning Europe. 

Most people are left in ignorance by politicians and mainstream media, who rarely think beyond the here and now. When informed about unsustainable consumption and human population growth they are shocked or deny the depth of interconnected challenges and the steps we need to take for a sustainable future, that go well beyond action on climate change.

 

The media invariably cloak population growth in terms of ‘increased demand’ – which narrow thinking growth economists portray as ‘good’ for growth. The key driver of overpopulation is at best ignored for ‘downstream’ sticking plaster responses by politicians and too often by ‘Greens’ who target ‘rights’ over ecological and resource realities.

 

“There is no social justice on a wrecked planet” –Brian McGavin

 

The type of powerful question put to former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders – and his reply was notable. We need to frame more clear questions to our politicians like this.

 

“Human population growth has more than doubled in the past 50 years. The planet cannot sustain this growth. I realize this is a poisonous topic for politicians, but it’s crucial to face. Empowering women and educating everyone on the need to curb population growth seems a reasonable campaign to enact. Would you be courageous enough to discuss this issue and make it a key feature of a plan to address climate catastrophe?”  

Sanders responded unambiguously: “Well, Martha, the answer is yes.”

 

Issue avoidance

A WWF reference to ‘mitigate human and elephant conflict’ in a newsletter doesn’t shout ever more human overpopulation pressure as a causal factor, or anything WWF wants to do about this. WWF advertising is a constant reset button of ‘save’ animals and give money so we can fight this decline – and it has been going on for over 50 years as our amazing bio-diversity crashes. NGOs and politicians need to engage in a much more honest dialog.

We face Systemic Population Denialism that is intellectually bankrupt and dangerously ignorant.  Where drastic exaggeration is used by people resistant to reality. When we raise our voices, we are obstructed by ill-informed media commentators with predicable recycled challenges on ageing population scares and how we need to increase births and immigration. Low birth-rate countries like Japan are NOT suffering a socio-economic crisis – and there are still 38 million people in the Tokyo metropolis alone!

Former Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger observes:

‘Good democracy relies on good information’.

 

Professor John Beddington, UK Government Chief Scientist in March 2009 warned that:

Our food reserves are at a 50-year low, but by 2030 we need to be producing 50% more food, we will need 50% more energy, and 30% more fresh water.”  

In 2017 over 20,000 scientist in 189 countries signed a Second Warning to Humanity, warning that humanity has failed to make sufficient progress in solving foreseen environmental challenges and most of them are getting much worse.

We simply don’t have the time for a gradualist message and we have to speed up the timeframe for action in people’s minds. Simplistic propositions by ill-informed, growthist commentators that developed economies were ideally placed to take in Africa’s exploding populations need shredding. Nor are we facing a ‘fertility collapse’, as growth pundits try to claim.

If governments won’t talk population, then they are not serious about cutting emissions, ensuring food supplies and a secure quality of life for our future.

At the heart of green politics is the simple premise that our prosperity depends completely on a healthy, functioning planet. Go on abusing the planet, go on ignoring climate change, go on ignoring population growth, and all else fails – including our deepest yearning for human rights.  (Jonathon Porritt, environmentalist)

We face huge interconnected challenges but it is easier to attract support for simple projects like saving a forest, than addressing ‘big-picture’ global problems. Major environmental groups keep their marketing too simple for the scale of the problems. Many environmental problems impact poor communities, but the social justice movement shows little interest in working with environmentalists on key challenges like biodiversity, resource depletion and overpopulation, deeming the latter as a racist agenda. We need to be clear and assertive not apologetic.

Environmental groups like XR and WWF talk about climate breakdown and ecological collapse but refuse to acknowledge the underlying over population demand driver, as they see it as ‘divisive, threatening or toxic’.

Unless we work collectively and stop creating wilful barriers of ignorance, because it might disturb people’s beliefs and comfort zones, we are leading our children to the abyss. A toxic intergenerational contract.

 

The ‘coercion’ taboo

Population concern organisations often run scared of any hint of population coercion. This can’t be sustained much longer as key resources decline and societies start to fall apart. In fact, society readily accepts values that could be interpreted as ‘coercive’ for the common good, with legal sanctions on the ‘freedom’ to drive at high speed in built up areas and fiscal incentives to discourage harmful behaviour. If we are to have any chance of a sustainable future we need to ‘incentivise’ fewer births rather than more, through the tax system and increase understanding so people make informed, socially responsible decisions in family size rather than merely saying it’s an individual choice.

 

Many people driven by self-centred beliefs will completely ignore calls for socially responsible decisions if this is all we are prepared to say. Yet social justice lobbies call for us to change to a vegan diet and travel less to compensate for ‘unavoidable’ population growth pressures.

 

 A long-term sustainable population is a ‘life-affirming’ message with many benefits for living standards and reduced infrastructure pressures.

 

Several countries, like Taiwan, Japan, Iran and Bangladesh) have transitioned to lower birth rates without coercion.

What about the rights of children to a sustainable future, rather than the ‘rights’ of parents to have large families?

 

The Ageing Population Scare – a transition not a crisis. The challenge of supporting aging populations is grossly over emphasized.  We spend more on cosmetics than we will need to support a temporary rise in older people. It is a phony argument that we need more people and more immigration to support ageing populations. Young people generally cost society more – in crime, in education and other ways. With typical short-term vision, we forget that all these extra young people get old too and will need support. The media and politicians never highlight this.

Mainstream media invariably frames any population decline as a ‘bad’ that has to be reversed for our continued well-being and economic growth.

 

A typical example appeared in The Times (UK) July 4, 2019 headlining Italian birth rates fall to lowest since 1861, “Prompting fears that the country is facing a sharp demographic decline.” “Russia is facing an even graver demographic crisis after the UN warned that its population could fall to half the present level by the end of the century.”

 

Another country with a ‘worryingly’ declining population is ‘stagnant’ Japan.  Yet the greater Tokyo metropolis is currently the world’s most populated city at around 38 million. Japan is well organised and on current fertility rates is projected to leave the list of world’s largest cities to be replaced before 2100 by Lagos at 88 million, Kinshasa 83m and Kabul in 10th place at 50m. (Population predictions for the world’s largest cities in the 21st century, Daniel Hoornweg, University of Ontario and Kevin Pope) 2017).  These cities are already chaotic at their current populations. Imagine them facing such numbers.

 

Sustainable numbers and UN Goals

The Second Scientists Warning to Humanity in 2017 listed 13 action points. The last point (m) said: “estimating a scientifically defensible sustainable human population size for the long term. Rallying nations is the UN’s job, but how do we define a long-term sustainable population?   

Global population is still growing at 1.036% a year and consumption at 3% a year, with resources declining rapidly.

Using Global Footprint data, the current average ecological footprint per capita would mean a sustainable population size for the long term would now be around 4.4 billion. But since there is no allowance made in this regularly updated snapshot for leaving any bio-capacity to conserve biodiversity, or depletion of non-renewable resources and enabling developing countries to reach more equitable living standards, we have to look at a lower population stabilisation nearer 3 billion – a number endorsed by respected ecologists like David Pimentel and Paul Ehrlich.

 

Unless we work collectively and stop creating wilful barriers of ignorance, because it might ‘disturb people’s beliefs and comfort zones’, our society and much of the planet’s bio-diversity will collapse before the end of the century, as critical food, energy and water resources become ever scarcer. Some might survive in an oppressive dystopia. We must plan for an equitable and responsible transition that preserves much of the diversity of our planet and a viable future for our children.

 

Cycle of silence.

Media coverage of environmental issues varies but remains historically low given its critical importance. There has been an upswing of concern with climate change and Extinction Rebellion protests but the media soon drifts back to celebrity gossip, economic growth and sport.

 

Today’s social media, with its narrow-framed ‘follow’ tags and identity politics, too often fails to see a wider connected picture. Dealing with complex issues on Twitter in 140 characters is practically impossible in a chain of slogans and responses. Celebrity manufactured social media gossip is off the scale of any proportionality and meaning. The baby boomer generation, not content with hoovering up household wealth and pensions of the generations below them are stealing from the future to pay for the present, while millennial media bubbles obsess with identity politics and seeking ‘safe space’. What matters is shaping the complex interactions and events we are all living through – absurd house prices, growing ecological collapse and the declining hope that tomorrow will be better than today

 

We are facing multiple and urgent global challenges, while the sheer stupidity of global turf wars for domination in fragile countries across the Middle East and Africa continue. We must appeal to sanity and the wider issues we must tackle.

 

Overpopulation and demand drives people to destroy the very resources they need to survive – freshwater, soils and forests. The social justice movement shows no interest in working with environmentalists. They simply have no concept of the impact of endless growth in our numbers and demand on biodiversity, infrastructure pressures and food security.

Religious extremism, from fundamentalist Christians, to ultra-orthodox Jews, to patriarchal Muslim cultures who all believe large families are integral to their beliefs and ignore the multiple environmental and social impacts is another barrier to sustainability. The denial of fertility management support translates into coercive child-bearing.

.

Given the immense challenges that will likely see starvation and conflict over remaining resources in the lifetime of people alive today, why would we think it better to create energy shortages, food shortages, lowered quality of life, a housing crisis, grid-locked traffic, bio-diversity loss, and many more calamities caused by ever increasing population pressures?

 

A lower population offers an enormous upside to environmental and social problems.

 

  • We avoid awful things like mass starvation, resource wars, rising pollution and catastrophic bio-diversity loss.

 

  • Small families in developing countries helps parents to afford their children’s education.

 

  • Ever more people simply drives humanity to a lower and lower standard of living.

 

  • Climate breakdown is an acknowledged danger, yet governments ignore the simple, most cost effective step we can take to reduce emissions – having fewer children. Several studies have shown this. (See drawdown.org and Wynes and Nicholas).

 

A number of tactics are widely used to grossly exaggerate claims and suppress discussion. There are common sense answers to all these challenges.

 

  • Population shaming Worrying about population growth and advocating for stabilisation and reduction is motivated by morally reprehensible characteristics like racism.
  • Population growth is good. Economies thrive with more people – increasing consumption. Population and technology gamble will resolve environmental problems of more people. Population fatalism Population may be a problem but there’s nothing we can do about it. Don’t scare the kids is a new media angle since climate warnings by teen activists.
  • Large families are caused by poverty. But large families amongst the rich go unnoticed. Regular TV shows showcase large families without any thought of the impact on others.
  • Lack of infrastructure is the fault of austerity not demand. Lack of housing and hospital beds is blamed on government cutbacks. We simply turn swords into ploughshares and infrastructure will be delivered. But the need to reduce total throughput and impact is ignored.
  • China’s former One-Child policy was coercive and denied ‘human rights’. In fact, China’s one-child policy was widely supported by the people because they were well informed by the government on the benefits. It lifted millions out poverty, helped China’s spectacular rise in living standard and only applied to people in cities. People in rural areas could have two children.  Now China has dropped the limit, with a still huge population because it swallowed the scare that there will be too few young people to support the transient phenomenon of an ageing population.
  • The Ageing Population Scare – a transition not a crisis. The challenge of supporting aging populations is grossly over emphasized. We spend more on cosmetics than we will need to support a temporary rise in older people. It is a phony argument that we need more young people and more immigration to support an ageing population. Young people generally cost society more – in crime, in education and many other ways. We forget they get old too and will need support. The media and politicians never highlight this.
  • Malthus was wrong. We are doing fine. Thomas Malthus’s essay in 1798 on the Principle of Population, predicting mass starvation if human numbers kept on rising, was only wrong in his timing. He couldn’t then know of the one-time binge the discovery of fossil fuels would give to global economic growth and how oil enabled the development of intensive agriculture.

 

Population Ignorant statements

Many media commentators ignore “doomsday” warnings, not because there is no supporting evidence, but because it does not fit with their long-held convictions of how the world works. Other tactics include ‘the practice of ‘Defamation’ to censor inconvenient truths.

Being a ‘National Treasure’ appears to be a license to talk rot.  (Alex Massie. The Spectator, 26/9/2013). Take the case of Sir David Attenborough. The poor booby is another neo-Malthusian. Which is another reminder that expertise in one area is no guarantee of good sense in another.

 

Australian bishop raps Green Party campaign on population fears 19/8/ 2010. Bishop Anthony Fisher. “The fears of a population explosion are absurd. Australia has close to the lowest population density in the world. Most of our country by far is uninhabited.”   (Yes – it’s desert!)

 

We have to change the mind-set of political leaders. Swedish Minister Ylva Johansson said her country “would take in refugees and “improve its population demographics with a smile.”

 

Brian McGavin, writer and environmentalist, is a director of Scientists Warning Europe. 

 

Get Mobilized and Make Love Go Viral!
Continue Reading

Economics

Local food sourcing saves people and climate

Published

on

World traffic in food by massive corporations harms environment, jobs, and health; yields no net change in food availability; and harms jobs and food security everywhere. Swedish linguist Helena Norberg-Hodge, founder of International Society for Ecology and Culture (now Local Futures), tells Helen Lobato of Women on the Line how prioritizing local food production and distribution will build back local economies and roll back corporate oil-dependent hegemony.

Source: WINGS: Womens International News Gathering Service

 

Get Mobilized and Make Love Go Viral!
Continue Reading

Economics

How the World Bank helped re-establish colonial plantations

Published

on

How the World Bank helped re-establish colonial plantations

In October 2020, a group of 79 Kenyans filed a lawsuit in a UK court against one of the world’s largest plantation companies, Camelia Plc. They say the company is responsible for the killings, rapes and other abuses that its security guards have carried out against local villagers at its 20,000 hectare plantation, which produces avocados for European supermarkets.

Such abuses are unfortunately all too routine on Africa’s industrial plantations. It has been this way since Europeans introduced monoculture plantations to Africa in the early 20th century, using forced labour and violence to steal people’s lands. Camelia’s plantations share this legacy, and the abuses suffered by the Kenyan villagers today are not so different from those suffered by the generations before them.

Abuses and injustices are fundamental to the plantation model. The question that should be asked is why any of these colonial plantations still exist in Africa today. Why haven’t Africa’s post-colonial governments dismantled this model of exploitation and extraction, returned the lands to their people and emboldened a resurgence of Africa’s diverse, local food and farming systems?

One important piece of this puzzle can be found in the archives of the World Bank.

Last year, an alliance of African organizations, together with GRAIN and the World Rainforest Movement (WRM), produced a database on industrial oil palm plantations in Africa. Through this research, we found that many of the oil palm and rubber plantations currently operating in West and Central Africa were initiated or restored through coordinated World Bank projects in the 1970s and 1980s. The ostensible goal of these projects was to develop state-owned plantations that could drive “national development”. The World Bank not only provided participating governments with large loans, but it also supplied the consultants who crafted the plantation projects and oversaw their management.

In case after case that we looked at, the consultants hired by the World Bank for these projects were from a company called SOCFINCO, a subsidiary of the Luxembourg holding company Société Financière des Caoutchoucs (SOCFIN). SOCFIN was a leading plantation company during the colonial period, with operations stretching from the Congo to Southeast Asia. When the colonial powers were sent packing in the 1960s, SOCFIN lost several of its plantations, and it was then that it set up its consultancy branch, SOCFINCO.

According to documents in the World Bank’s archives, SOCFINCO was hired by the Bank to oversee the development and implementation of oil palm and rubber plantation projects in several African countries, including Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Gabon, Guinée, Nigeria, and São Tomé and Príncipe. SOCFINCO oversaw the development of blueprints for national oil palm and rubber plantation programs, and helped identify lands to be converted to industrial plantations.  It was also paid to manage the plantations and, in some cases, to organize sales of rubber and palm oil by the state plantation companies established through the program.

SOCFIN received lucrative management fees through these projects, but, more importantly, they positioned the company to take control of the trade in agri-commodity exports from Africa – and eventually to even take over the plantations. It was a huge coup for SOCFIN. As the World Bank projects were operated through parastatal companies (companies owned or controlled wholly or partly by the government), local communities could be dispossessed from their lands for plantations under the justification of “national development” – something that would be much more difficult for a foreign company like SOCFIN to do. Indeed, a condition for World Bank loans was that the governments secure lands for the projects, a step made easier by the fact that most of the projects were being implemented by military regimes.

The World Bank projects also allowed SOCFIN to avoid the costs of building the plantations and their associated facilities. Under the projects, the African governments paid the bill via loans from the World Bank and other development banks.

It was not long before the parastatal companies set up by the World Bank were mired in debt. Of course, the Bank blamed the governments for mismanagement and called for the privatisation of the plantations as a solution – even if those plantations were already being run by the high-priced managers of SOCFINCO and other foreign consultants.

In the privatization process that then followed, SOCFIN and SIAT, a Belgian company founded by a SOCFINCO consultant, took over many of the prized plantations. Today, these two companies control a quarter of all the large oil palm plantations in Africa and are significant players in the rubber sector.

Nigeria is a good example of how this scheme worked. Between 1974 and the end of the 1980s, SOCFINCO crafted master plans for at least seven World Bank-backed oil palm projects in five different Nigerian states. Each project involved the creation of a parastatal company that would both take over the state’s existing plantations and develop new plantations and palm oil mills as well as large-scale outgrower schemes. Overseeing all of SOCFINCO’s work in Nigeria was Pierre Vandebeeck, who would later found the company SIAT.

All of the World Bank projects in Nigeria generated enduring land conflicts with local communities, such as with the Oghareki community in Delta State or the villagers of Egbeda in Rivers State. After dispossessing numerous communities from their lands and incurring huge losses for the Nigerian government, the parastatal companies were then privatised, with the more valuable of the plantation assets eventually ending up in the hands of SOCFIN or Vandebeeck’s company SIAT.

SIAT took over the plantations in Bendel state through a subsidiary and then, in 2011, it acquired the Rivers State palm oil company, Risonpalm, through its company SIAT Nigeria Limited. Vandebeek was SOCFINCO’s plantation manager for Risonpalm under the World Bank between 1978-1983.

SOCFIN, for its part, took over the oil palm plantations in the Okomu area that were also developed under a World Bank project. It was SOCFINCO that first identified this area for plantation development as part of the study it was hired to undertake in 1974. The Okomu Oil Palm Company Plc. (OOPC) was subsequently established as a parastatal company in 1976, and 15,580 hectares of land within the Okomu Forest Reserve of Edo State was “de-reserved” and taken from the local communities to make way for oil palm plantations. The company hired SOCFINCO as the managing agent to oversee its activities from 1976-1990. Reports vary, but at some point between 1986 and 1990, OOPC was then divested to SOCFIN’s subsidiary Indufina Luxembourg.

This sordid history explains why so many of subsidiaries of SOCFIN and SIAT in Africa still carry national sounding names, like SOCAPALM in Cameroon or the Ghana Oil Palm Development Company. It also explains why these companies are so well designed to extract profits into the hands of their owners, and the crucial role of the World Bank for facilitating this corporate profit-seeking process in the name of “national development”.

 

Courtesy of Local Futures, This post is adapted from a GRAIN blog

Get Mobilized and Make Love Go Viral!
Continue Reading

Translate:

Mobilized TV

Mobilized TV on Free Speech TV  takes a deep look at our world, the consequences of human activity on our planet, and how we can reverse and prevent existing and future crises from occurring. Mobilized reveals life on our planet as a system of systems which all work together for the optimal health of the whole. The show delves into deep conversations with change-makers so people can clearly take concerted actions.

Produced by Steven Jay and hosted by Jeff Van Treese.

Mobilized’s TV series Mobilized TV  premieres on Free Speech TV on Friday, October 15, 2021. All episodes appear:

Fridays 9:30 PM Eastern (USA/Canada)

Saturdays; 6:30 PM (Eastern USA/Canada)

Sundays: 8:30 AM Eastern (USA/Canada)

Nov 26,27,28: Imagination will take you Everywhere: Howard Bloom
Howard Bloom has worn many hats. As an Author, he’s known for “The Global Brain” and “The Lucifer Principle” and many others.  As the head of the Howard Bloom Organization, for many years, he empowered a team of publicists to connect his stable of artists with media, creating successful campaigns for Joan Jett and the Blackhearts and Amnesty International, The Jacksons Victory Tour, Billy Joel and John Mellencamp. But his real passion is science and discovery, and empowering human soul into the creation of optimal systems that serve all.  Howard claims that “We need a vision for the future that we could reach towards by looking up, the same way JFK encourage us to look into the sky and go to the Moon.”  It is this type of vision that great societies try to attain.”

December 3,4,5: How can we eliminate heart disease featuring Dr. Michael Ozner

How a better understanding of whole system health can bring about more health and well-being. We spend a little quality time with celebrated preventative cardiologist and Author of The Complete Mediterranean Diet, Dr. Michael Ozner.

December 10, 11, 12 Dr. Julie Peller: Plastics Everywhere: What can we do about it?

Dr. Julie Peller is a professor of chemistry at Valparaiso University, where she studies microplastic solution. On today’s show, Dr. Peller discusses the extent of microplastic pollution in our environment and the risks they pose to human health.

December 17,18, 18: Population Matters with Dave Gardner of Growthbusters

Scientists have stated that unlimited growth on a finite planet with finite resources is an impossibility? So if growth is unsustainable, what does that mean for a growing population?

Mobilized TV5 days ago

Howard Bloom: Imagination Takes You Everywhere

Featured6 days ago

From Punk to Planet: Slam Dunk the Junk with Dave Street

Uncapped7 days ago

The Hoodless Hoodie and No-Wax Floors

An Empowered World1 week ago

If Democracy is in Peril, How do we Reverse Course to fix it?

Editorials1 week ago

The Decisive Role of Conscience: Clues for Non Violence

Asia1 week ago

The Love for All Animals

Featured1 week ago

Community and World Health: Protecting Native Seeds

An Empowered World1 week ago

In Chile, A different and courageous alternative with new ideas and proposals for leadership

Agriculture1 week ago

Celebrating Food Sovereignty | Highlights of Solidarity Actions in October

Agriculture1 week ago

Food Sovereignty, a Manifesto for the Future of Our Planet | La Via Campesina

Editorials2 weeks ago

Good Needs Better Distribution: We Already Have the Tools We Need to Solve Climate Change

Chuck W.3 weeks ago

The United Nations system: What’s Gone Wrong? What’s Gone Right?

Mobilized TV3 weeks ago

A Moral Responsibility: Jean Su, Ctr. for Biological Diversity

Editorials3 weeks ago

OPINION COLUMN: No presidential program raises paradigm shift in education

Mobilized TV4 weeks ago

On Free Speech TV: Rethinking Humanity with James Arbib of RethinkX

International1 month ago

Anti-mining resistance repressed in El Estor

International1 month ago

Coronacrisis, neoliberalism, democracy: what’s next

Asia1 month ago

Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina’s recent meeting with Pakistani envoy has a message for India

Mobilized TV1 month ago

Sustainable Architecture, Design and Building for a Sustainable Planet

Mobilized TV1 month ago

A better understanding of lawn care for Climate Care featuring Dr. Rob Moir of the Ocean River Institute

Mobilized TV1 month ago

Stories from the Reservation: Davidica Little Spotted Horse

Editorials1 month ago

Understanding the global neglect of indigenous peoples

Editorials1 month ago

Diabetes And Net Zero

Agriculture1 month ago

Land Workers of the World Unite: Food Sovereignty for Climate Justice Now!

Featured1 month ago

Free Speech TV: Mobilized with Dr. Rob Moir of the Ocean River Institute

Featured1 month ago

A Primer on Climate Security

Editorials1 month ago

A Finger In The Dam

Mobilized TV1 month ago

Free Speech TV: Episode 001: Davidica Little Spotted Horse

Editorials1 month ago

The Green Jobs Advantage: How Climate-friendly Investments Are Better Job Creators

Editorials1 month ago

Behind the Lofty SDGs the Reality is People Don’t Trust Governments to Act

Editorials1 month ago

Rebranding Public Service

Agriculture2 months ago

More than 65 groups call to fundamentally reorient its approach to global policy development on food and agriculture issues.

Chuck W.2 months ago

“We hold” this truth “to be Self-evident.”

Editorials2 months ago

The Monsters Go for a Walk in Chile

Editorials2 months ago

Sharing Surplus: An Ethic of Care

Editorials2 months ago

“If there is gas collusion in Chile, then distribution should be done by a public company”: Sector workers

Africa2 months ago

Eurasian Women’s Forum Seeks Answers to Significant Questions in Women’s World

Editorials2 months ago

Modifying the Organic Statutes at the University of Santiago de Chile

Featured2 months ago

Towards Latin America’s Nonviolent Future

Featured2 months ago

Phytotherapy, knowledge and experiences 03- “A path to the deep”.

Editorials2 months ago

Lies Kill

Editorials2 months ago

Lifting Seas to the Skies—The Invention of the Tree

Create the Future2 months ago

Global Wisdom Events

Create the Future2 months ago

Arts and Entertainment

Create the Future2 months ago

Let’s Create Systems That Serves People and Planet, Not corporations or governments

Editorials2 months ago

Chile: The Iquique bonfire, a national shame

Editorials2 months ago

The “Myth” of Independence (When in Reality, We are Interdependent)

Editorials2 months ago

Screen addiction, there’s still hope

Editorials2 months ago

Saying Yes to Food Sovereignty, No to Corporate Food Systems

Editorials2 months ago

La Via Campesina: The UN Food Systems Summit is hogwash. It is a threat to peoples’ food sovereignty

Categories

Trending

Translate »
Skip to toolbar