Comment by the Wildlife and Environment Society (WESSA)
Work in progress
11 July 2002
The
New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) purports to be about human
development effort and poverty eradication. The last paragraph of the introduction calls for a partnership
with the international community to "overcome the development chasm that
has widened over centuries of unequal relations".
While Africa needs to develop, the type of development should be environmentally sustainable to avoid Africa falling into the same trap that the developed countries are now in. The NEPAD document of October 2001 fails to fully comprehend that the wealth of so-called developed nations was gained at huge environmental cost. Europe has almost no indigenous forests left; global warming is largely due to environmentally irresponsible industrial practice; the developed world produces tons of waste which it does not know what to do with; agriculture is subsidised by developed nations that are depleting scarce natural resources by overproduction of agricultural products for which there is no market; and the tap water in Europe is not drinkable. Is this the development chasm that we need to overcome?
Sustainable Development:
The
section on Sustainable Development (paragraph 71) is quoted here as an
important indicator of the lack of importance given to the ecological leg of
sustainable development:
"African
leaders have learnt from their own experiences that peace, security, democracy,
good governance, human rights and sound economic management are conditions for
sustainable development…”
NOWHERE in this paragraph is the word environment mentioned.
Paragraph 10 of NEPAD acknowledges the "ecological lung provided by the continent's rain forests and the minimal presence of emissions and effluents that are harmful to the environment".
Paragraph 138 recognises that "a healthy and productive environment is a pre-requisite for NEPAD”. A healthy environment is clearly one which functions in an ecologically sustainable way and provides a life support system to both humans and other species. A productive environment is a little more difficult to comprehend. Logging, commercial monocultural agriculture, and overfishing produce huge economic gains in the short term but will leave Africa in an even worse state in the long term. The loss of habitat from such commercial practices mean that the "ecological lung" will soon by clogged.
Paragraph 100 speaks to the parameter of infrastructure. This paragraph probably indicates an extreme lack of understanding with regard to sustainable development.
"Infrastructure
is one of the major parameters of economic growth, and solutions should be
found to permit Africa to rise to the level of developed countries in terms of
the accumulation of material and human capital."
This statement puts Africa on the path to destruction. The world's resources are already being used up 20% faster than they can be replaced. What is needed is a development path which enables people to enjoy a good quality of life without destroying our life support systems such as clean water and air. It is not possible for Africa's poor to live the same lifestyle as that of the rich developed nations. However, it is possible for us to attain a better quality of life without accumulating the same material wealth.
The Environment Initiative (paragraphs 138-142) does not speak about maintaining strong environmental standards, so as to ensure that Africa does not become a haven where dirty industry is welcome. Four of the eight sub-themes focus on rehabilitation of past damage. One sentence speaks of "best practices". However, the same sentence refers to "utilising coastal resources to optimal effect”, a term which tends, in our experience, to indicate that environmental considerations are rated of low priority.
Other sections within NEPAD only speak about optimising and promoting sector specific objectives with no reference to environmental best practise nor adherence to ecological limits.
The governance and finance sections within the Environment Initiative are meaningless in that there is no substance to them, and there is no connection with the environment. As they stand, they are simply stock phrases with no meaning.
Participation:
Paragraph 47 glowingly speaks of a development agenda that must be prepared "through participatory processes involving the people". However, the manner in which NEPAD was developed did not involve "the people". If NEPAD is really about participatory democracy and development for African people, then the poor and marginalised people who are supposed to benefit, should have a meaningful input into their development agenda.
Meaningful participation around NEPAD would involve inviting constructive criticism as well as an openness to the review and amendment of NEPAD. Instead, any so-called consultation has arrogantly focused on persuading people to support NEPAD, and has defensively resisted any criticism, preferring to believe that those who raise concerns around NEPAD do so only because they don't understand it!
Recommendation:
Paragraph 71 must be adjusted to reflect the accepted meaning of sustainable development. The term cannot be adopted and redefined to promote destruction of our natural resources.
All sectors of civil society, especially the environmental sector, need to be given space to make meaningful input into all stages of NEPAD, including the formulation of the vision. If we start off on the wrong track, it will be too late to correct our path once the damage has been done.
National WESSA Representative, WSSD &
Regional Manager (WESSA: WC)