BEYOND THE RHETORIC: ZIM’S WATERLOO

BY WISDOM MUDZUNGAIRI

It is now acknowledged that Zimbabwe cannot achieve its development targets unless there are appropriate investments in agriculture, environment and natural resources management. Covering two-thirds of the country, agriculture can make a significant contribution to national development. But, failure to integrate climate change into the national economy is perhaps the main reason for the failure of national development since independence.

Investing in agriculture is now a constitutional imperative that is binding on the government. The institutional foundations for integrating agriculture into national development are also now in place. What remains to be overcome are the persistent negative narratives about climate change vis-à-vis agriculture that has traditionally held back development, and for all concerned actors to translate the policy reforms into actual benefits for the sector and the country.

So when Environment and Natural Resources Management minister Francis Nhema said Zimbabweans needed a shift of mind-set to put more value to the environment by avoiding veld fires, land degradation and bad mining practices, he was right.

Without an iota of doubt, human action has greatly contributed to the climate change phenomenon that has resulted in natural disasters such as droughts and floods.

Many people are suffering due to environmental problems, mainly caused by humans. Therefore, it is time all Zimbabweans should adopt strategies that scrap insignificant weather events. These policies and programmes, if implemented quickly and at multiple scales, could help avert environmental stresses.

To effectively curb environmental problems, these policies and programmes must take into account existing social, political and economic tensions and avoid exacerbating them.

For instance, Nhema said adaptation projects such as conservation agriculture and water harvesting should be taken seriously if the country was to fight the extreme weather events being experienced.

Stopping climate change only requires the commitment of all, otherwise we will have runaway climate change whose consequences are colossal. But what is runaway climate change? Dear reader, it is a theory of how things might go badly wrong for the planet if a relatively small warming of the earth upsets the normal checks and balances that keep the climate in equilibrium. As the atmosphere heats up, more greenhouse gases are released from the soil and seas. Plants and trees that take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere die back, creating a vicious circle as the climate gets hotter and hotter.

The phrase “tipping point” is heard a lot more from scientists. Once the temperature rises a certain amount, then all the ice caps will melt. The tipping point in many scientists’ view is the 2˚C rise that countries have adopted as the maximum limit that mankind can risk.

Beyond that, as unwelcome changes in the earth’s reaction to extra warmth continue, it is theoretically possible to trigger runaway climate change, making the earth’s atmosphere so different that most of life would be threatened.

As with a lot of climate science, what used to be theory is now being seen in practice on the ground. New information makes clear that reaching the tipping point is a much more immediate threat than was previously thought.

Hence the key question is: How close are we to a 2˚C rise, and when will we get there? The first thing to admit is that nobody knows for sure, but many who understand the science say the answer to this twin question is, first, that we are already very close, and, second, we might get there terrifyingly soon. In fact, the 2˚C threshold is much closer than almost anyone outside the specialist scientific community is prepared to acknowledge.

By any standard, if we care about the future of the human race, it is too close for comfort. So to the vital question of when we might reach 2˚C above pre-industrial levels; in other words, how much time do we have to curb our excess emissions? Warming is directly related to the quantities of greenhouse gases there are in the air, the chief of which is carbon dioxide.

On this evidence it is clear that drastic action is needed. Countries such as Zimbabwe and many others need to have clear climate change policies that can be understood by the people and supported by government structures.

Having attended five United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) consecutive conferences in the last few years, I have discovered that recent evidence demands that we need to cut existing emissions by between 60% and 80% in the next 40 years to stand a chance of preventing climate change becoming unstoppable, and keeping control of our own destiny.

IT’S BENEFICIATION OF DIAMONDS, NOT LESS!

BY WISDOM MUDZUNGAIRI

The discovery of Marange diamonds in 2006 revitalised the need for Zimbabwe to derive maximum benefits from its gems.

Almost immediately, several diamond cutters and polishers sprung up in response to government’s call to beneficiate its rough diamonds.
But, the sector’s image was blighted in 2010 when it emerged that some “manufacturers” were smuggling rough stones out of the country instead of beneficiating them.

There were also indications that government had dismally failed to introduce policies that favour the country’s economic growth by empowering locals just as it has to sectors of the economy.

To start with, the challenge that local diamond companies are facing and others that have already acquired cutting and polishing equipment is the licence fees.

The licencing fee was $20 000 a year, but it went up to $100 000 a year. There are, however, behind-the-scenes efforts by way of engagement with the Ministry of Mines to cut the figure down.

These fees are too high such that they actually contribute to the cost of production per carat. The operating costs were $100 per carat.

This makes our product uncompetitive when one compares it with $6-$8 a carat in India, a country with roughly one million people in the industry.

To be viable, many like me, believe that these fees should match what Botswana and South Africa are doing. In Botswana they charge a BWP100 a year for up to 10 years, which is BWP1000, just above $100. That is competitive. South Africa does not go beyond R5 000 (just above $500) for up to five years.

Locally, the tenure is also a problem, it is just a year. It is a challenge in the sense that one is not in a position to attract meaningful investment, whether it’s local, regional or international.

Zimbabwe has reportedly the highest volume of diamond deposits in the world making it the undisputed producer of 25% of the world’s diamonds.

Can someone explain why government has continued to frustrate the emerging of a strong diamond industry? The reasons being that there are 12 firms that have state-of-the-art machinery to fully exploit the diamonds mined in Zimbabwe. There is also both local and external expertise to add value to our rough diamonds.

Sadly, the focus by government had been on obtaining quick cash from the auctioning (whether nicodemously or not) of the diamonds, thereby starving the country of a potential source of employment for millions of local youths.

President Robert Mugabe is on record saying Zimbabwe polished only 0,1% of 8,5 million carats of diamonds produced in 2011.

But indications are that attempts to boost the local diamond beneficiation industry would not work unless there is a sufficient subsidy to compensate for the higher costs involved. This is despite the fact that diamond producers are forced to allocate 10% of their annual production to local cutters and polishers.

It appears surmounting challenges facing the fledgling sector have constrained the mining industry for worse. Consequently, government should come up with policies that bolster the diamond sector.

Until Zimbabwe boosts the capacity of indigenous diamond cutters by crafting economically viable pieces of legislation to aid locals, nothing will move.

It is not only disturbing that when legally registered local diamond polishers and cutters require diamonds for their trade, they are made to pay an astronomical $300 000 while this requirement does not apply to foreign buyers.

Sadly, foreign buyers are at an advantage over their local counterparts yet they buy to boost their countries’ economies. As a result of this requirement, only one local company has so far managed to pay for cutting and polishing diamonds in Zimbabwe.

This stringent measure is not necessary given that diamonds have in countries such as India created over one million jobs for the diamond and other sectors.

This move by Mines ministry gives a gloomy picture of the sorry state of our diamond industry.

So that alone makes the local product or exports way expensive.
Visionary leaders would simply realise that with its rough diamonds, fast-growing Zimbabwe could be a dominant force in the world’s economic landscape for decades to come if she gets her act together.
Zimbabwe is one part of the world that has got a very high growth rate that is accelerating given Finance Minister Tendai Biti’s forecast of six percent growth this financial year.

But to harness the boom, Zimbabwe must improve technology, education and the rule of law, including reducing corruption.
If all of those things happen, this is going to be our decade.

millenniumzimbabwe@yahoo.com/@wisdomdzungairi

One Response to It’s beneficiation of diamonds, not less!

Mageja Siziba April 15, 2013 at 11:46 pm #

Brother Wisdom, thanks for a very pertinent analysis of a subject matter which is very close to a lot of peoples’ hearts. With the discovery of diamonds in Marange & now in Bikita and a few other places in the country, we would envisage that Govt would want to use the precious mineral resource to transform the lives of Zimbos by creating massive job opportunities in the cutting & polishing sector. But with the ridiculous licence fees pegged at $100 000 which have to be renewed annually, who amongst us locals can penetrate that industry? As Zimbos, we can continue talking about local beneficiation of the stones, but without anything happening on the ground. The Indians will happily continue to increase employment levels beyond 1 000 000 in polishing & cutting our diamonds in their country while we stagnate. Dubai will also continue to reap enormous economic benefits with the value of its trade on its diamond exchange growing from virtually nothing in 2005 to $39 billion in 2011. That trade on the Emirates bourse is projected to rise between $500 billion & $1 trillion in the next 10 years on the back of increased sales of Zim diamonds to the Middle East country. Meanwhile, Zimbos continue to expertly shoot ourselves in the foot conjuring more regulations & obstacles to stifle locals from investing in more industrial value chains in the diamond industry. The prohibitive licence fees have not been justified so much as to raise revenue for Treasury but as an attempt to please foreign & local critics of Marange diamonds that Govt is taking measures to prevent smuggling of the commodity across boarders. If Mzansi & Bots can levy nominal licence fees for cutting & polishing in their respective countries, Zimbabwe should do much better than that, surely! We want a minimum of 2 000 000 cutting & polishing jobs in the next 5 years & the establishment of a minerals commodity exchange without fail.

CLIMATE CHANGE NOT A CRISIS OF AFRICA’S MAKING

BY WISDOM MDZUNGAIRI

Zimbabwe – a nation once regarded as an economic powerhouse in Sub-Saharan Africa and considered to be the breadbasket of the region – has had its fair share of tribulations on the political scene which has resulted in it becoming a symbol of ridicule, shame and contempt by the international community in the manner in which it has failed to resolve the political impasse that has been in existence for the past decade or so.

The post-referendum period has had incessant drawbacks of bickering, power struggles and political immaturity.

This has left the ordinary person on the street in utter despair as Zimbabweans wait in vain for the improvement in the basic service delivery systems. Although it might be appreciated that the inclusive government inherited an extremely battered economy which saw a global record inflation rising to astronomical proportions than any country has ever had to endure, some few positives can be pointed out in terms of the introduction of the multi-currency regime that has seen goods and services become available and prices stabilising to a certain extent.

Now basic food commodities seen on the shelves are reasonable and quite affordable prices except that all the political focus is on elections, ignoring other economic sectors of the economy that need as much attention as the others.

I believe climate change is one area that has not been given the much-needed attention it deserves, yet it is a key issue in the international arena. It is a real threat, concern and challenge for all countries of the world.

Over 70% of Zimbabweans depend on annual rains for the water necessary to grow crops, but those rains have been less predictable. This year could see even more numbers facing starvation due to the poor rainfall.

The impact of climate change presents a new hurdle in the fight against extreme poverty and disease as almost 1 million Zimbabweans will need food aid. The changing climate could also mean more frequent drought and floods, water scarcity, and increased health challenges such as under-nutrition.

I must point out that climate change is not a crisis of Africa’s making, yet it is Africans, especially the poorest, who will suffer the first and the worst.

These new challenges will not only make achieving the Millennium Development Goals more difficult, but add yet another challenge for those struggling to combat extreme poverty and disease by exacerbating the conditions of poverty, but threatens to erode the gains that have been made in recent years.

A recent study has found that climate drives a large part of African diarrhoeal disease and increases the threat to vulnerable communities.

The only study of its kind in Sub-Saharan Africa is based on three decades of historical data and has important implications for arid countries around the world struggling with poverty and increasing health challenges.

According to Katherine Alexander, a veterinarian who teaches in Virginia Tech’s College of Natural Resources and Environment and conducts research at her non-profit Centre for African Resources: Animals, Communities, and Land Use (CARACAL): “Diarrhoeal disease is an important health challenge, accounting for the majority of childhood deaths globally
. . .”
Diarrhoeal case incidence peaks in both the wet and dry seasons in many Africa countries with mean case incidence 20% higher on average in the dry season over the wet season.

It is essential to include affected communities in identifying climate change preparedness.Also lack of socio-cultural considerations in public health planning can result in locally applied interventions being non-sustainable.

Understanding climate variability as a determinant of infectious disease is increasingly seen as a cornerstone of climate change preparedness and an urgent area of need in Africa and elsewhere around the world.

Much of the threat of climate change on health results from our vulnerabilities to environmental change. These vulnerabilities are primarily associated with the poor, who are most dependent on the environment and least able to adapt to changes in these systems.

Sadly, had it not been for our poisoned politics, government could simply have addressed current community health deficiencies and climate change impacts would not likely have such important and potentially devastating consequences in the future.

It is vital for the country to develop reliable projections for rainfall to maintain the safety of food production for a large share of the population.

Unfortunately, the beauty of Zimbabwe has been fading with every year due to climate change effects neglect. One cannot imagine why a country like Zimbabwe has failed to produce a climate change blueprint 33 years after independence.

Environment and natural resources is not only about wildlife, it means much more. A climate change policy will do the trick.

BRING CLIMATE CHANGE INTO NATIONAL SECURITY DIALOGUE

BY WISDOM MDZUNGAIRI

This past Monday, Environment and Natural Resources minister Francis Nhema discussed his experiences at the Joint Command and Staff Course Number 26 at the Zimbabwe Staff College in Harare.

He shared his insights with senior army officers attending a course on the holistic approach needed in dealing with environmental challenges being experienced in the country such as deforestation, poaching, land degradation and pollution.

Despite coming from opposite sides of the partisan divide, they echoed the consensus of policy wonks that the range of difference between plain politicians and soldiers policy agendas is actually very narrow.

Nhema seemed to advise that President Robert Mugabe, Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and the Army should resist getting so absorbed in managing current crises as to neglect taking measures to forestall the development of future conflicts.

He didn’t quite go into specifics, although I have a feeling that he would or wouldn’t agree with me on climate change being a top national security concern.

Climate change — the most pressing issue facing the world, Zimbabwe and our generation — does not seem a hot enough topic to be addressed by politicians across the political divide.

“Security analysts and academics have warned for some time that climate change threatens water and food security and the allocation of resources which in turn could increase forced migration, raise tension and trigger conflict,”he said.

“Let me emphasise that African governments and security forces in particular will need to manage these impacts to ensure that competition for resources does not lead to violent conflict.”

The United States military for instance, has in recent years pulled far ahead of its government in renewable energy investments, committing to incorporate solar, wind, biomass and geothermal power into its energy profile by 2025. In 2010, the Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review described global warming as a destabilising force. The US Department of Defence didn’t quite consider it a cause of conflict yet, but rather a catalyst of conflict.

Resource wars are certainly not a historical novelty, but climate change’s interference in the harnessing or cultivating of resources will create a pressure cooker for conflicts over food, water and energy.

By 2030, the US National Intelligence Council, a government agency, predicts that nearly half of the world’s population will live in areas of severe water stress. Unfortunately, if climate predictions have been any indication, projections — especially government-sanctioned ones — are usually far too conservative to allow for effective policies.

In Africa — Zimbabwe in particular — we are hardly immune to resource-related security vulnerabilities.

The growing number of extreme weather events, including storms, poor harvests, wildfires and flooding, have incurred for industry and government staggering costs in lost operation time and recovery efforts.

This season’s drought and record-breaking heat wave decimated all hopes of good harvests as they left farmers and policymakers, both domestic and international, with a range of problems –food security, loss of profit and impact on the various industries dependent on maize.

There is an additional way in which national security and climate change needs to be considered. As resources have become depleted due to increased consumption and population growth, we are frantically scouring the globe to secure access to energy, minerals and land.

China, a country that the US has a sensitive relationship with, has vied for Canadian tar sands oil, an array of mineral resources ranging from gold to diamonds in Zimbabwe, oil in Angola, DRC and Great Lakes region. China has also expressed interest in developing Greenland’s rare earth metals and acquired agricultural land leases in Africa put its economic trajectory on amassing cheap resources from the black continent.

In all these cases, the resource bidding war privileges countries with political or economic advantages and deprives the people living in countries with resources to exploit. The conflicts that are going to spring up will either force the US to consider an intervention or directly pit the US against another world power.

Hence the security forces have a role to play in the management of each country’s resources, protecting them from plunderers. It is clear that the environmental challenges that Zimbabwe is facing have got a bearing on the security situation over and above the socio economic situation.

Nhema firmly believed (he said it) that our sovereignty as a country was compromised if these environmental challenges were not addressed.
It is therefore time to bring climate change into the National security conversation so that we sustainably utilise “our resources.”

IS FRANCIS A GREEN POPE?

BY WISDOM MDZUNGAIRI
When Jorge Mario Bergoglio won the Catholic papal conclave’s vote for new pope on March 13, he also announced his new name – Francis or Francesco in Latin.
The name is a reference to Saint Francis of Assisi, a venerated Catholic friar who lived in the 13th century. St Francis is the patron saint of animals and the environment.

He was known for his dedication to poverty and reform, which may send a signal about this new pope’s concerns. But popes didn’t always pick a papal moniker also known as a regnal name. And today, they rarely get overly creative with the choice. In other words, while many the world over are increasingly in search of unique baby names, I am sure Catholics do not expect to see a Pope Zulu or Pope Musenyamwa anytime soon.

And last Tuesday, Pope Francis I urged leaders in all fields to protect people and the environment, and to shun hatred, envy and pride as he formally began his so-called “ministry” in front of an estimated crowd of over 100 000 on St Peter’s Square at the Vatican, Rome. Leaders from around the world, including President Robert Mugabe, attended while millions watched from their countries just six days after his election.

After receiving the symbols of his office, including his papal ring, the pope addressed what he called “all those who have positions of responsibility in economic, political and social life” to “not allow omens of destruction and death to accompany the advance of this world” and for ordinary people to become the protectors of humanity.

“It means protecting all creation, the beauty of the created world . . .It means respecting each of God’s creatures and respecting the environment in which we live. It means protecting people. It means more . . . In the end, everything has been entrusted to our protection, and all of us are responsible for it.”

Interesting stuff, isn’t it especially coming from the leader of the 1,2 billion Catholics, whose church has been plugged by scandals?

Will the man live up to the ideals of his 13th-century Italian namesake? I’m not a Catholic, but there is a precedent for papal advocacy against a warming world.
Pope Benedict XVI, his predecessor, made climate change an important part of his tenure. In 2011, he urged international leaders to take a leadership role on limiting greenhouse gas emissions. The late Pope John Paul II also presented a similar message back in 1990 saying “the ecological crisis is a moral issue” especially in the developing world.
Given the large numbers of leaders that rate the pope highly to the extent of falling over each other just to get his attention, one wonders whether they take his messages seriously or to them the pope has become their club member – we –the — leaders and — them – the masses — scenario.

Perhaps Pope Francis should not only continue to voice concern about global warming, but begin working with world leaders to bring about solutions to stabilise the earth’s dangerously precarious climate. Pope Francis hasn’t been in his new position long enough to share his stance — although he is known to oppose same-sex marriage and abortion — but Catholics do know that so far, he has lived a life with a relatively small environmental impact. In Argentina, his native country, he reportedly took the bus every day, lived in an apartment rather than the traditional archbishop’s palace, and cooked his own meals, according to a report on CNN.

Many artistic portrayals of St Francis of Assisi connect him with the environment. It was not surprising then, that the Pope declared him the Patron Saint of the Environment in 1979. Why in the 21st Century, in the midst of global pollution and warming, expanding holes in the ozone layer and massive devastation of our planet’s eco-systems, do we look to a 13th century man to give us guidance and inspiration?

Long before the environment became an issue, St Francis saw human beings abusing nature. There is no doubt that he demonstrated an affinity with nature and with the animal kingdom.

Many of the old medieval legends about St Francis speak of his ability to communicate with nature in an extraordinary way. There is the famous story of how he tamed the man-eating wolf that terrorised the citizens of the small village of Gubbio. We are told he even lifted worms from his path so that they would not be trodden upon. St Francis’ regard was reportedly not just for animals. Toward the end of his life, as he was going blind, doctors had prescribed applying a red-hot poker to his forehead.

As might be expected, people today are deeply concerned about the environmental issues afflicting our planet. In fact, it is by now evident that there is no good future for humanity or for the earth unless we educate everyone towards a style of life that is more responsible to the created world. The ecological crisis reveals the urgent moral need for a new solidarity, especially in relations between the developing nations and those that are highly industrialised.

Politicians or popes are often discussed in terms of legacy. Catholics remember pontiffs who tackle big issues and overcome daunting challenges. Pope Francis I has the chance to be remembered for many things, one of which must be his actions in helping the world establish a long-term strategy that ensures energy security, protects human health and the environment.

millenniumzimbabwe@yahoo.com

One Response to Is Francis a Green Pope?

rolex replica March 27, 2013 at 8:39 am #

wonderful articles and thanks for sharing.