Jun 28

The changing IMF

Leer la versión en Español

Next Thursday the International Monetary Fund (IMF)-the international organization that oversees the global financial system- will have to elect a new Managing Director (MD), after Dominique Strauss Kahn’s (former MD) resignation. The two candidates for the position are France’s economy and finance minister Christine Lagarde and Mexico’s central bank director, Agustin Carstens. They both have outstanding resumes and seem to be highly competitive for the position.

Since its foundation, the IMF’s managing director has always been a European male. Lagarde (a woman), and Carstens (from a developing country), could therefore bring a new approach to the institution. But to know what is at stake in their candidacy, we need first to understand the institution.

To begin with, all the members of the IMF are countries. To become a member you have to give at a certain quota. Each quota is the amount of currency that each member contributes to the overall fund.  Thus, the IMF can be thought of as Continue reading

Share

Jun 28

Debate Over Libya Rages on Capitol Hill

News on our involvement in Libya has taken a backseat recently after all the drama with Congressman Weiner and President Obama’s announcement about the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, but the conflict has been raging on despite the lack of US news media interest.  It’s been raging on here in the states, too; specifically, the debate over US involvement in Libya.  For months Congress has been grappling with two resolutions, one which would authorize Obama’s intervention in Libya and one which would cut funding for the interventional, and finally on Friday the House voted against authorizing US involvement but did not cut funding.  The first resolution, sponsored by Rep. Hastings, would have granted Obama the ability to continue operations in Libya for the next year, while the second resolution, sponsored by Rep. Rooney, would have limited the funds available to the Department of Defense for US aid to NATO.  The vote was largely symbolic, as the votes will not force Obama to withdraw from Libya, but still served as a powerful warning to the White House.

Both sides, pro-continuing-intervention-and-funds and the anti-continuation-and-funds, presented what I think are some very interesting arguments behind their votes.  Those who supported the first resolution and opposed the second insist that the military action is on course and to derail it now would seriously damage the cause the Libyan opposition has been fighting for.  Further, some argue that since we are already involved, we must see the operation through to the end (sound familiar, anyone?).  The opposition, meanwhile, focuses mainly on Obama’s breach of the War Powers Resolution of 1973. Critics say that Obama not only violated the War Powers Resolution by engaging in hostilities without consulting Congress, but showed a lack of respect for the legislative branch.

At first, I considered the opposition’s argument to be petty and narrow.  Quibbling over semantics—should the intervention be considered “hostilities” and thus a breach?  Or should it be called a “military action” and thus not a breach?—and who should have consulted who, doesn’t Congress have better things to do with their time, especially when it comes to as complex an issue as the conflict in Libya?  But, the more I thought about it, the more valid the argument seemed.  How can we hope to overthrow a dictator and build a more democratic government if our President shows little respect for our own democratic government and constitution?  I wouldn’t go so far as to say the president is becoming a monarch, but the White House certainly has historically pushed the bounds of the Constitution when it comes to what is or is not a war and what needs or needs not be brought before Congress.  So it was not a petty move to debate over the legality of Obama’s actions, but rather a reminder that the President, even as Commander-in-Chief, cannot simply do whatever he wants without consulting Congress and making a case for military intervention.  Of course, Obama is hardly the first president to do this.  Since the War Powers Resolution was passed Congress has opposed numerous military actions–including the Iraq war–but that has not stopped Bush (I and II), Reagan, Nixon, and the rest from getting involved in conflicts abroad.

Of course, just because I came to see the opposition’s argument as valid does not mean I came to see the supporter’s argument as any less valid.  Like it or not (a topic for another blog post), we are involved in the conflict in Libya, and so to pull out early would be to undermine the Libyan opposition and NATO and the cause for which we have been working.  With Qaddafi on the ropes, as many have suggested he is, withdrawing now could reverse the progress that has been made thus far.  The Obama administration contends that by supporting NATO action in Libya they were supporting the Libyan people and helping to end human rights abuses and repression, a noble goal.   So, dropping out of the fight now would send a very poor message to the rest of the world and demoralize those who are fighting for democracy.

As Friday’s vote made clear, though, the House is not opposed to intervention in Libya, Continue reading

Share

Jun 27

Spotlight On: Bridges to Community

In the past few weeks, I’ve written about how difficult it is for for a nonprofit organization to successfully address more than a single issue in a sustainable way. Complex problems – like poverty, for example – can rarely be solved by fixing just one aspect, which makes it difficult to make sustainable change. One organization that has been successful with its multidimensional plans and goals, however, is Bridges to Community – a nonprofit that focuses on community development in Nicaragua. Three years ago, I went on a trip to Masaya, Nicaragua with Bridges. The goal of my particular trip was to build houses for two families that – like most members of the community – were practically living in a “home” of sticks, tarp, and dirt. While I may be partial to the Bridges’ efforts to build houses, I’m actually most impressed by the various other work that the organization does. Bridges addresses multiple issues of Nicaragua, which leads to sustainable and progressive development in the communities.

I think the reason why Bridges is so successful is their community involvement. They don’t just travel to Nicaragua, build a house, and leave – they do a lot of work with members of the community so things continue to improve long after individual trips are over. Their involvement ranges from improving health and education to promoting economic development. But included in each of their initiatives is a way for local Nicaraguans to participate and help improve their own community. After all, there is only so much an outsider can do to solve local issues – without involvement from Nicaraguans, any initiative would fail. There’s simply no way to create sustainable change without the cooperation of the community the nonprofit is trying to help.

When we were building the houses, for example, there were about two dozen Nicaraguans who had been hired by Bridges to help us. Whether it was to help us mix cement, lay bricks, or cook dinner, the locals were given employment opportunities by the nonprofit. Additionally, Bridges hosts workshops that teach Nicaraguans valuable skills like arithmetic, literacy, and accounting that enable them to get a better job or create a small business. The nonprofit actually invests in Nicaraguans’ potential to be successful in a number of ways, including granting loans to local businesses with careful consideration. Many prioritize single mothers and empower women to create a small business out of their house (such as making baskets or clothing) rather than working in a factory or depending on a male partner. These loans have reportedly doubled the income of more than half of the recipients, which is obviously a remarkable success.

The other aspect of Bridges’ mission is to foster cross cultural understanding between Nicaraguans and Americans. Besides the language barrier (Spanish/English), these two cultures are practically two different worlds. My trip to Masaya was one of the most unique experiences of my life that I’m incredibly thankful for. Not only did I return to the U.S. with an appreciation for my flushing toilet and stable home, but I also  had a great respect for Nicaraguans. I was barely able to speak a word of Spanish, but we still managed to communicate without much help from the translators, and I learned how truly wonderful and kind the people of Masaya are. This brought a whole new element to the services Bridges provides – sure, they could simply hire a group of 20 Nicaraguans to build houses and that would surely help the community as well, but bringing a group of Americans to the country allows both cultural groups to learn about each other and foster a greater understanding. Additionally, we funded our own trip (plane fare, food expenses, etc.) and also the materials to build the house, so Bridges doesn’t lose money by having international volunteers do most of the labor. Bridges also partners with schools and religious organizations, which allows them to have a consistent amount of interested volunteers to travel to Nicaragua.

The key is that Bridges to Community uses the community to strengthen the community. It is so much more than just building a house – Bridges is helping to rebuild a community. By helping Nicaraguans build their businesses, learn useful skills, and have a stable job, Bridges enables them to improve their community in a sustainable way. This multidimensional approach allows the nonprofit to truly live up to its name and bridge a community struggling with poverty to one of progress, achievement, and hope for a better future.

Rebecca Birnbaum is a Program and Research Intern for the SISGI Group focusing on nonviolent conflict resolution, nonprofit management, and sustainable development. She is a senior at the University of Michigan, where she studies Anthropology, Political Science, and Peace and Social Justice. To learn more about the SISGI Group, visit www.sisgigroup.org.
Share

Jun 27

Those Grieving Alone – Seek Support

First of all, I’d like to thank all of you who took the time to give me feedback on my recent post on suicide. Whether you commented on the article on this site, tweeted me about it, retweeted it to your followers, or talked to me about in person, your actions meant a lot to me. I am new to blogging, and I was worried nobody cared about what I had to say. I am ecstatic that my writing seems to be reaching many people and promoting important discussions among many of you.

While all of your feedback has been valuable, one particular comment stood out to me. Angelita commented on my post:

“Great article. Ya know, I never realized how dangerous depression could be, at any age. I just lost my husband to suicide on May 19, 2011. I never thought he was as sick as he was inside. He was 36 years old. I have so many emotions about the whole thing. But I never wanted to ever have to remember him-the last time-hanging in the garage. I am very greatful to websites like this one. I am not the only one. Thanks again!”

The last line in your comment had a particularly profound effect on me. Your comment reminded me that, sadly, you are not alone. Many people in the world have to cope with losing a loved one to suicide. Yet, because of the taboo that has been put on talking about suicide in our society, many people deal with their grief alone. If just reading my previous article provided you comfort by reminding you that other people are going through a similarly terrible time, imagine how helpful it could be to share experiences with other people who have gone through the same type of grief?

As I mentioned in that post, the grief that a suicide survivor (someone who has lost someone he/she cares deeply about to suicide) must deal with is deep and unique. Some grievers cannot overcome the blame that they needlessly put upon themselves, and others cannot overcome their bewilderment or anger that their loved one has committed suicide. We invest a lot of time and money in suicide prevention. But the truth is, it is unlikely that we will ever be able to completely eradicate depression or suicide. Since complete eradication is unlikely, there will continue to be more suicide survivors. A 2001 study published that every suicide intimately affects at Continue reading

Share

Jun 24

The Importance of Tolerance

Teaching Children to Accept Differences in Society

One of the most important tools a child needs in his or her social toolbox is the ability to be tolerant of others. The world is composed of people from different backgrounds who speak various languages, and follow diverse customs and religions. Any child, whether in the United States or elsewhere, will be exposed to someone who identifies with a faith that is not the same as their own. In today’s society, especially with how globalized the world has become, it is important for children to learn to accept others from an early age. Not only will children become morally strong, but in the future they will have an economic advantage when they respect others from around the world.

Learning to be tolerant and respectful of others is key to being successful in life. Due to the fact that children mimic their parents, tolerance can be easily taught to a child from an extremely early age. Many parents are friends with people from different cultural backgrounds, and an easy way for parents to teach their kids to be tolerant is to learn and share more about the heritage of their friends. Sometimes, simply being educated about the customs, holidays, and beliefs of another person is enough to foster tolerance in a home. A lack of education can lead to stereotyping groups of individuals, and denying the qualities that make them unique. When a child learns to be open-minded about the various cultures, foods, people, and faiths surrounding them, the easier it will be for them to accept others when they get older.

If tolerance leads to acceptance and understanding, then intolerance breeds innumerable negative issues. According to Dr. Michele Borba, a child advocate, author, and speaker, intolerance is a major contributor to the rise of bullying among children younger than nineteen. Dr. Borba explained that most children say bullies pick on kids who are different in some way, shape, or form. Bullies tend to go after children who are overweight, too thin, have difficulties with speech or learning, dress a certain way, speak a different language, and a myriad of other reasons. A child who has not been taught to accept others for their unique qualities, not just cultural differences, will most likely bully children who he or she thinks does not conform to the “norms” of society. That is why it is imperative that children be taught that they cannot dictate what is “normal” because every person, including themselves, is distinctive in some way, and that is what makes the world so very interesting.

In order to prepare children to be open-minded individuals from a young age, there are a few things parents can do to help teach tolerance. First, parents must be careful of what they say around kids because children pick up on negative phrases and slurs almost immediately. This causes a child to think that it is okay to repeat hurtful words or comments to someone else because their parents used these worlds around them. Another important piece of information for parents to keep in mind, is making sure that they teach their children to respect themselves. Often times, a child who lacks self-esteem will treat others badly because they are not confident about themselves. Learning to respect others begins with a respect of one’s self, and that is one of the most essential keys to teaching tolerance to a young human being.

Fostering and nurturing tolerance in a child, is one of the biggest gift’s a parent can give their young one. The world is incredibly globalized, and children will cross paths with an individual who has different beliefs and ideologies at some point in their lives. People from diverse backgrounds can be found in every job field, and a child that cannot accept differences in others will suffer in the future. Thus, in order to control bullying, strengthen morality, and secure promising futures for a child, parents should endeavor to teach their children tolerance from a young age.

Share

Jun 24

How Effective are John Schools?

Ending the vicious cycle of prostitution and sex trafficking is no easy task.  For years, the focus has been on criminalizing the “suppliers” of sex, most of whom are women and children that have been lured into ‘the life,’ or ‘the game,’ by exploiters who control and manipulate them.  With radical feminist and religious activists raising awareness about the victimization of those enslaved by pimps and traffickers, and used for sexual gratification by johns (buyers of sex), the focus of law enforcement and partnering agencies has shifted from punishing the supply side to the demand side of the business.  One controversial initiative that has been progressively popping up in several national and international communities is that of the “john school.”

A “john school” is an educational, diversion-type program for male buyers of sex in which they are taught about the risks and harms associated with prostitution and sex trafficking.  Generally, first-time offenders are given the option to attend one day of john school and pay a fine, or face prosecution and public shame.  As you can imagine, many choose the former.  While each john school operates differently, there are some basic premises.  Johns often hear harsh testimony from prostitutes and former victims about their histories of abuse and lack of desire to participate in sex acts with customers out of free will.  They learn how they negatively affect the women they buy.  Johns learn of the health implications associated with prostitution and how this can affect family and community, as well as the legal consequences of buying sex.  The goals of these programs are to make johns realize that prostitution is not a victimless crime, understand the detrimental implications, and deter further involvement.

Do john schools effectively curb the demand side of prostitution and sex trafficking?  Well, studies have found contradictory results.  Findings from a study on the first U.S.-established john school in San Francisco, the First Offender Prostitution Program (FOPP), indicate that it is overall a stellar program that is reproducible, cost-effective, and reduces recidivism of offenders.  Yet the same study, as well as others, offers some criticisms.  Perhaps one of my biggest criticisms of the program is that it is too focused on the effects of prostitution and does not get to the core of what drives men to purchase sex in the first place.  What are the reasons men buy sex?  How can these conditions be channeled into more positive behaviors?  What are more positive behaviors to satisfy the conditions?

None of these are discussed, which leads me to my next criticism—there is little to no interaction in the classroom.  The usual method of teaching consists of presenters standing in front of the room spewing information.  A more effective approach would most likely be multi-modal—presenting, handouts, Q&A, group discussions, open forum to discuss issues related to personal involvement in buying sex, and so forth.  Furthermore, there is no evaluation measure set in place to test whether offenders understood and retained the information presented.  There should be something set in place to make the classroom experience more effective, particularly if it is only for one day.

My third criticism is that the john school is only for one day—offenders are set free afterwards with no further repercussions.  I do not know of any sustainable programs that can be implemented in one day and receive incredible results.  I would suggest adding follow-up, individual sessions for a specified period of time in order to increase effectiveness.  Offenders could have the opportunity to ask questions, seek further information, share experiences (that may even be helpful to law enforcement), and receive a consequence that will be considered more serious than just attending one day of class.

Further research and evaluative measures need to be carried out in the future.  I suggest that research not only be conducted on the recidivism of offenders as a result of john schools, but how it may be linked to reducing the actual problem of prostitution and sex trafficking in their communities overall.  Is the reduction in offender recidivism actually reducing the overall problem?  Offenders who participated in john school did not self-report lower levels of the likelihood to engage in future prostitution solicitation.  Therefore, is john school effective in eliminating the demand side?  Furthermore, it has been found that men arrested for prostitution solicitation have low rates of recidivism overall, despite whether or not they have attended john school.  So is the lack of offender recidivism actually due to john schools or because johns are being more cautious in their prostitution involvement? What do you think?

Cynthia Castaldo-Walsh is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Group focused on gender-based conflict, non-violence and peacebuilding for conflict transformation, and sustainability for conflict resolution.
Share

Jun 24

“Winning” isn’t everything.

President Obama’s announcement on Wednesday night of his intention to withdraw around 33,000 troops from Afghanistan by the end of next summer is a much-needed precursor to the end of our military engagement there. The nation-building that needs to be done in Afghanistan is not something we are able to make happen with the sword: It is imperative that we seek meaningful social services and social interventions to reduce the social ills that breed terrorism. The alternative is creating more of the social and economic instability brought by war, thus sustaining terrorist recruitment and organizations. Of these facts there should be little doubt.

However, some Americans seem to have a very different conception of our military presence in Afghanistan. It is important to dissect these concepts so that we can understand the world that we as changemakers are operating in. I point out, for example, Tim Pawlenty’s response to President Obama’s address on his 2012 campaign facebook page:

 

Mr. Pawlenty is one of many who see our role in Afghanistan not as nation-builders, nor as healers, nor as changemakers. To him, our troops are Roman legions, sent to seek victory – whatever it is – above all else. The war is unsustainable; putting more troops in harms way provides no tangible benefit to us or to the people of Afghanistan. Yet, Mr. Pawlenty seems to be under the impression that whatever “winning” might be, it is of the utmost importance, and the only way to achieve it is to continue to send soldiers to fight it until he is satisfied America has won.

This is not to say that Mr. Pawlenty and others who believe what he believes might not have the best of intentions (that argument is for a different venue). However, his potentially good intentions are wasted on an unclear goal (“winning”) that involves unsustainable methods that no one can seriously deny are unable to effect the changes needed in Afghanistan. Is the goal to reduce terrorist threat coming from Afghanistan, or to fight until we win? And if so, what is there to win?

How is this approach – the idea of “winning” at all costs, and only by an fixed set of methods – like so many well-intended ideas so flawed? And how many among us in the social services and intervention community suffer from the same inability to think beyond our ideas to deliver meaningful and sustainable changes where they’re needed most? We have all seen the well-meaning individuals and foundations who can’t effect change because their goals don’t make clear sense, and their methods are so frozen that they are unable to adapt to the world as it is. We know what’s wrong with them: Their model is stuck, just like Mr. Pawlenty’s, on an unachievable or vague goal that renders them unable to think of new ways to achieve desired outcomes.

In our own lives as people dedicated to causes, we need to step back and assure that we are not satisfied to live in this paradigm of victory over outcomes. Plodding through on our ideals, not recognizing when programs aren’t working the way we thought they’d be, or that methods need revision, or even that, as is often the case, the target moved just as you were getting close to it – all of these things are pitfalls on the way to making meaningful interventions and sustainable change. It is necessary that we remember that our actions need to be based on reality, and focused on clear goals that bring us incrementally closer to permanent solutions and real change.

Mr. Pawlenty’s response to President Obama will gain him (and the President) some political points. But applying the critique we might offer of his statements to our own lives and aspirations as changemakers is critically important.

 

Share

Jun 23

The Necessity of Training

Pulling out from Afghanistan without leaving behind a native security force capable of handling the job would be a mistake

Towards the end of my second deployment to Iraq, I was offered a rather unique opportunity. Through a hookup from a fellow Arabic linguist, my coworkers and I were allowed to join a police training team for a week or so. The purpose of these teams was to instruct classes of Iraqi soldiers on basic military tactics – land navigation (land nav), patrolling, house clearing, etc. A deployed military translator typically spends most of their time behind the scenes in a dark, secure room. Needless to say, I was stoked for the chance to put down my headphones, get some fresh air and hang out with Iraqi soldiers who barely knew any English.

I didn’t end up providing much instruction (my land nav skills were less than fine tuned) but I did help translate for the Marines who were giving the actual instruction. After the stuffy classroom courses, I spent some time roaming through fields helping the Iraqi soldiers locate waypoints in the land nav practice course. I kept the conversation going while we were wandering around because I wanted to hear their stories and opinions – it was fascinating to hear how these Saddam era intelligence Colonels felt about learning basic military skills from US forces as post-Saddam lieutenants. Everything was in Arabic except when I asked my group of 8 or so trainees what they thought of the current condition of their military. They replied in unison English, “Baaaad.” How disheartening.

By the time that I left Iraq in early 2010, US forces were well on their way to halting combat operations altogether. These days, the 47,000 troops or so that remain in Iraq are there doing something similar to what I did for that small stretch in the fields – training the Iraqi security forces on everything from basic skills to advanced counterinsurgency operations.

Much of what I’ve written over the course of the past two months has focused on how to create a sustainable impact rather than simply offering a temporary solution to a chronic problem. In the case of Iraq, the temporary solution would be to eliminate as many terrorist cells and create as secure of an environment as possible while US forces are still there. A more sustainable solution would be to train the Iraqis on how to perform these tasks themselves.

In this, I believe we have succeeded, at least to a limited extent. The larger operations that have taken place in the last two years have almost always been joint operations of US and Iraqi forces. As the deadline for US withdrawal nears, final evaluations of Iraqi security forces are commonplace. Though at times these evaluations appear to be painting a rosy picture, it’s clear that the Iraqi forces are moving along – they are certainly far better equipped to secure their country than they were five years ago. Obviously, the true test will be what happens when these new forces are completely on their own come 2012. A lot has changed since I wandered the Iraqi training fields. Instead of disparaging when asked about the status of their military, perhaps now those disgruntled lieutenants would merely shrug.

I present my experiences and all this information as a way to frame the discussion on US withdrawal from Afghanistan. Today, President Obama is due to announce his plan on withdrawing troops from last year’s surge. The amount of factors that play into this decision is dizzying and I do not envy the President’s responsibility to make a choice.

Amongst these factors, however, the status of Afghan security forces must be considered one of the most important. Despite the many voices that opposed US presence in Iraq, mine included, most have quieted down as reports of bombings and deaths have diminished. The relatively secure environment of 2011 Iraq is in large part due to this much-improved Iraqi security force I have been talking about. Without this, the US pullout from Iraq would spell a far more volatile future.

The same principle goes for Afghanistan. If the ISAF forces intend on creating a sustainable impact there, they must continue to provide security while police training programs continue to be ramped up. Trainees that find their way into Afghan police training camps are overwhelmingly illiterate, rendering many conventional training methods useless. As with so many other aspects of the military, training forces must adapt to this reality and find other methods of instruction. In spite of this and myriad other challenges, the training must go on.

Even if President Obama decides to withdraw the surge, he would be wise to follow outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gate’s recommendation for a slow overall withdrawal. That way, we could leave behind a native security force that would be capable of handling counterinsurgency operations on their own, or at least with minimal support from ISAF forces.

Many mistakes were made in the various iterations of Operation Iraqi Freedom, but one thing we got right was the importance of training and supporting the local population. It is imperative that we do the same in Afghanistan.

Ryan Pavel is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Group focusing on foreign military involvement, policy and strategy into conflicts and motivations behind and impact of foreign aid. To learn more about the SISGI Group visit www.sisgigroup.org
Share

Jun 23

Opportunity in the Developing World

When someone thinks of an “underdeveloped” or “developing” country, it’s all too easy to envision an area that is lagging behind (both technologically and economically) the Western world. It’s common to think of these places as needing our help to catch up to the standards we set and to follow the trends that we start. But there’s another way to view these developing countries, and one that puts these areas in a much more positive and optimistic light. What if, instead of viewing the underdeveloped world as places that need to catch up, we saw opportunities to start new, more sustainable trends?

There are several trends set by the “developed” world that should actually be reversed – like burning fossil fuels for energy, for example. This practice has already negatively impacted our environment and contributed to climate change, so there’s no reason why developing nations should follow in our footsteps when creating their own ways to utilize energy. There aren’t nuclear power plants built in many of these countries yet, which means there’s a huge opportunity to form new energy policies resulting in clean energy.

This article from the World Resources Institute, discusses the necessity for developing countries to create high performance energy systems at a low cost. Obviously, this is no easy feat – but the good thing is that people are talking about it. The 2011 Asia Clean Energy Forum, for example, is a conference between policy makers, NGOs, and private companies that is focused on creating a low-carbon future in Asia. Here, the most efficient, cost-effective, and sustainable practices in clean energy are evaluated, and solutions to potential obstacles are discussed. I think it’s no coincidence that two Asian countries have already made considerable progress in creating a low-carbon future – China has been so successful in decreasing the cost of wind energy that it is likely to be financially competitive with coal in just a few years, and Indonesia has created an innovative energy plan that utilizes water flow to harness micro-hydropower.

Another important thing to mention – that is briefly addressed in the article, but I think deserves specific attention – is the concept that these innovative energy ideas don’t have to come from just one developing country. Efficiently utilizing different sources of energy, like wind and solar energy, for example, requires many different parts and services. Each tiny step can be mastered by a different country, and a web of interdependence and connectedness can be formed among many developing countries. If each nation is part of the growing trend, then they can all experience the economic prosperity of the clean energy system they’ve built. This not only has the potential to create a functioning system creating clean energy, but it can also cause underdeveloped economies to greatly prosper.

We live in a world that is constantly changing. Technology continues to advance in order to make things better and faster, but some of our “advanced” practices have compromised the quality of our environment for the sake of cheap and efficient energy. Clean energy is undoubtedly our world’s future – in the face of climate change, we simply don’t have any other option. Evaluating what works well and what doesn’t work in developed countries can provide these areas with ideas of how to best develop their own communities in the most sustainable way. I think there should be conferences like the Asia Clean Energy Forum worldwide that specifically discuss clean energy options and spark new ideas for a low-carbon future. After all, innovation may not happen with a snap of your fingers, but it can result from a forum of inspirational ideas and clean energy aspirations.

Rebecca Birnbaum is a Program and Research Intern for the SISGI Group focusing on nonviolent conflict resolution, nonprofit management, and sustainable development. She is a senior at the University of Michigan, where she studies Anthropology, Political Science, and Peace and Social Justice. To learn more about the SISGI Group, visit www.sisgigroup.org.

Share

Jun 23

Attempts for Sustainable Fishing, Part One

Shark Fin Soup

When my sister recently got married, my parents and I traveled to Taiwan to throw a wedding banquet so our entire family could be together.  My parents splurged on one of the fancy menus at the banquet hall so that my sister would have “nothing but the best”.  As we ate course after course of food, a bowl of soup came out for everyone.  I am an avid lover of soup so I excitedly dug in and ate until I encountered something I had never eaten before.  After a few minutes of chewing on this gelatinous piece of mystery, I ventured to ask my mom exactly what I was eating.  After informing me that I was eating shark fin “in honor of this joyous occasion” I panicked and didn’t eat anything else for the remainder of the meal, in fear I’d ingest something else that was cruelly and wastefully slaughtered.

Shark fin soup has been a delicacy for East Asians (mainly Chinese and Taiwanese) for hundreds of years, but was previously reserved for only the emperor and his guests, or the wealthiest families.  When middle class individuals in China and Taiwan began to earn more money about 20 years ago, shark fin suddenly became more attainable.  Shark fin soup – while still very expensive – has managed to become a staple in menus served at parties, weddings, or any function where the host wishes to honor the guests (or simply show off).  This has caused shark finning to quickly gain momentum in the fishing industry and has placed an immense strain on the shark population in an unprecedented amount of time.  Tens of millions of sharks are killed each year only for their fins.  Once caught, fishermen cut off their fins with stunning efficiency before throwing them back overboard to drift to the bottom of the sea, helpless and no longer able to swim.  What follows is I’m sure a slow and agonizing death.

Even though shark fin soup is a delicacy that originated in China and Taiwan, shark finning is a practice that transcends borders, causing shark fin soup to no be longer limited to these areas of Asia.  Chinese restaurants all over the world now serve Continue reading
Share