Urbanization
Urbanization can be the root of many problems. A housing challenge emerges because there are not enough houses to hold the influx of people in the city. There is also a work shortage as not enough jobs are open for people to work and make a living. Thus, many people seek jobs in the informal sector.
"city level studies have revealed that the social response to economic crisis and austerity has produced a variety of changes at the household level. These include increased labor force participation by women and income earning on the part of children and the elderly" (p. 435). From this quote it is clear that economic crisis affects the most vulnerable populations in society; women, children and the elderly. In times of economic hardship it must be twice as hard to scrape together a living, which can affect their diet, their kid's ability to go to school etc.
"Bangalore is the Silicon Valley of India and has developed a world reputation as a computer soft-ware center. For many cities their global niche is to provide a manufacturing base, often founded on low labor costs and export-oriented activities" (p. 433) It is interesting how cities are urban centers for technology but lots of it is built on under-paid workers and for some, the exploitation of women and children.
According to the book, Bombay has one of the highest population densities in the world, one reason is because the area was originally seven linked islands. People live in shelters made out of plastic, cardboard, cloth or whatever they can find. Right next to these slums is 'Bollywood,' India's gleaming epicenter for film and where the wealthy live. It is interesting to note that the author said the slums as intransitory, so a family can live on a crowded patch of pavement for 20-30 years; communities develop and mature and for slums to seem established to a foreigner's eyes might be a little surprising, since they may seem so uncluttered and unorganized to the naked eye.
When people live in crowded areas and they are poor, they will tend to have poor health and nutrition. They tend to live shorter lives. Increased # of births and migration contribute to urban growth. Some social needs: water, sanitation, drainage. In summary, it is important for governments and city planners to recognize urban dwellers as active citizens. In this century, the world's poorest populations will be in the South and urban poverty will be a problem due to rapid urbanization. When one is poor, it is tough to make a living in the city.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Ch. 7 Journal
Environment & Sustainability
issues at hand: increasing industrialization is destroying the environment
some causes: overpopultion, overgrazing, energy production, increased production
some effects: atmospheric pollution from car exhaust, coal burning, soil depletion & erosion
questions to think about: what will happen if everyone in China consumed on the same level as Americans?
we need to learn how to manage the 'global commons'
This chapter talks about the change in perception of the environment, from the 'conquest of nature' to 'managing the commons.' Conquest of nature meant that our interaction with the environment was required to survive- it was a " either we take over nature to survive, we nature takes over us" mentality. Conquest of nature involves transforming the environment creatively and as a necessity. An important author in the 1960s, Rachel Carson, published "Silent Spring" revealed the destructiveness caused by DDT, which affected the food chain. An example of environmental destruction is when Japanese fishermen were affected by high levels of mercury found in fish, called the case of "minamata" in the 1970s. More recently, there is an oil spill in the ocean and a company under BP is responsible for the million (or billions?) of dollars in damage. I heard on the news today they are still trying to stop the oil leak from reaching the coastline of Louisiana. Their latest strategy is to fill sandbags to stop the oil flow underwater. Environmental concerns were discussed at the Brundtland Commission.
It is disappointing that the United States did not sign the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty meant to reduce carbon emissions, when the US was responsible for 25% of the carbon emissions in the world. As a powerful nation, it is important to set an example to take care of the environment and we had failed in that category.
vocab: sustainable development (SD)- development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs
neoliberal view: nature can be summed up in economics, resources given a price in capital and SD achieved by following the laws of economics
people-centered view: focuses on local concerns, the needs of the local people working in partnership with gov. associations to achieve SD, includes traditional medicine practices
global environment management view: this emphasizes cooperation between countries to be good stewards of environmental resources, teamwork! view was presented at Agenda 21 'Earth Summit' meeting in Rio in 1992
In summary: sustainable environment involves the participation of everyone. The author said that in the future, the outlook of SD seems to be the relationship between social and economic interests instead of the relationship between humans and the environment. Environmental problems not only affect nature but also the the livelihood of human beings, as well as animals, the food chain etc. Achieving SD will impact all sectors of life, not only economically but also politically, socially and individually. I think that a big change can come from America. We have the potential, but our consumption levels are still high and we, as a nation, waste a lot. If America established new laws to conserve the environment this will be effective. Look at Singapore, Canada or (from my own experience) Hong Kong. Everyone in HK touts a cloth bag. I know in some governments they will charge people for plastic bags. Good idea. Americans would probably fight law tooth-and-nail but if no one enforces these laws to stand for the goal of achieving SD, no one else will. Non-profits and other group alreaday try and if the gov. will back them up, the green movement will be all the better. A sidenote: some companies like Sam's club and Ikea do not bag items. Instead, they load them back onto the shopping cart so customers can just load them into their cars. There is no need for a plague of plastic bags.
I feel like an environmentalist writing this, but it always gets to me how Chamapaign has no recyling program. I heard there's a rumor that Champaign will develop one soon. Anyways... just comparing America to Senegal in terms of bathing habits. When I was in Senegal, people in the village usually took cold bucket showers. This saves a TON of water, in comparison to 20 minute hot steaming showers. Imagine if all Americans started taking bucket showers, how much water that would save!
issues at hand: increasing industrialization is destroying the environment
some causes: overpopultion, overgrazing, energy production, increased production
some effects: atmospheric pollution from car exhaust, coal burning, soil depletion & erosion
questions to think about: what will happen if everyone in China consumed on the same level as Americans?
we need to learn how to manage the 'global commons'
This chapter talks about the change in perception of the environment, from the 'conquest of nature' to 'managing the commons.' Conquest of nature meant that our interaction with the environment was required to survive- it was a " either we take over nature to survive, we nature takes over us" mentality. Conquest of nature involves transforming the environment creatively and as a necessity. An important author in the 1960s, Rachel Carson, published "Silent Spring" revealed the destructiveness caused by DDT, which affected the food chain. An example of environmental destruction is when Japanese fishermen were affected by high levels of mercury found in fish, called the case of "minamata" in the 1970s. More recently, there is an oil spill in the ocean and a company under BP is responsible for the million (or billions?) of dollars in damage. I heard on the news today they are still trying to stop the oil leak from reaching the coastline of Louisiana. Their latest strategy is to fill sandbags to stop the oil flow underwater. Environmental concerns were discussed at the Brundtland Commission.
It is disappointing that the United States did not sign the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty meant to reduce carbon emissions, when the US was responsible for 25% of the carbon emissions in the world. As a powerful nation, it is important to set an example to take care of the environment and we had failed in that category.
vocab: sustainable development (SD)- development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs
neoliberal view: nature can be summed up in economics, resources given a price in capital and SD achieved by following the laws of economics
people-centered view: focuses on local concerns, the needs of the local people working in partnership with gov. associations to achieve SD, includes traditional medicine practices
global environment management view: this emphasizes cooperation between countries to be good stewards of environmental resources, teamwork! view was presented at Agenda 21 'Earth Summit' meeting in Rio in 1992
In summary: sustainable environment involves the participation of everyone. The author said that in the future, the outlook of SD seems to be the relationship between social and economic interests instead of the relationship between humans and the environment. Environmental problems not only affect nature but also the the livelihood of human beings, as well as animals, the food chain etc. Achieving SD will impact all sectors of life, not only economically but also politically, socially and individually. I think that a big change can come from America. We have the potential, but our consumption levels are still high and we, as a nation, waste a lot. If America established new laws to conserve the environment this will be effective. Look at Singapore, Canada or (from my own experience) Hong Kong. Everyone in HK touts a cloth bag. I know in some governments they will charge people for plastic bags. Good idea. Americans would probably fight law tooth-and-nail but if no one enforces these laws to stand for the goal of achieving SD, no one else will. Non-profits and other group alreaday try and if the gov. will back them up, the green movement will be all the better. A sidenote: some companies like Sam's club and Ikea do not bag items. Instead, they load them back onto the shopping cart so customers can just load them into their cars. There is no need for a plague of plastic bags.
I feel like an environmentalist writing this, but it always gets to me how Chamapaign has no recyling program. I heard there's a rumor that Champaign will develop one soon. Anyways... just comparing America to Senegal in terms of bathing habits. When I was in Senegal, people in the village usually took cold bucket showers. This saves a TON of water, in comparison to 20 minute hot steaming showers. Imagine if all Americans started taking bucket showers, how much water that would save!
Sunday, May 2, 2010
'The Fractured Community,' by Kate Crehan
Ch. 3: The Community of Kin
Zambia, prior to independence, was known as Northern Rhodesia. There was a significant prescence of missionaries who helped create a written language to write the Bible from the oral language Kaonde. Europeans discovered copper in the 1920s and began to exploit the nation for its rich minerals, solidifying a copper mining industry. There was a huge labor migration to urban areas for work and protests began in the 1930s. After independence, Zambia's infrastructure began to deteriorate. The North-Western province is sparsely populated and infested with tsetse flies, mkaing it difficult to keep livestock.
Crehan depicts Zambia through Gramsci's definition of the state: "The State is the entire complex of practical and theoretical activities with which the ruling class not only justifies and maintains its dominance, but manages to win the active consent of those over whom it rules." This chapter talks about kin relationships that create the political and relational power structures within society.
The author talks about kinship (the "imaginary community") and local authority as coinciding aspects of the political sphere. However to the people of Zambia, kinship was very important. In comparison to the West, we have "come to think of kinship and its obligations as occupying its own particular domain." The Kaonde kinship is based on matrilineal descent, meaning that a child will belong to the clan of his or her mother. There are 8 kinship "statuses" such as inanji (mother), mwisho (mother's brother) kolojanji (older sibling) nkasanji (younger sibling), mwana (child) mwipwa (nephew/niece) nkambo (grandparent) or munkana (grandchild). These are the roles that people in society identify with. The colonists found it odd that households were female-headed. Chiefs were also identified as "owning the land" and had "authority over everything that happened within their area" but when the author tried to clarify the chief's role, she found out that "the chief had nothing to do with soiety." This distinction between male and female roles is interesting because last week was a discussion about "Women in Development" and "Gender and Development." In some societies they already have a disctinction of roles and women even hold more power than men. Like the Koande, women carry the family name. Therefore sometimes devlopment discourse assumes that women are unequal and need to climb their way up to meet the level of a man's privelege, but some African socieites have already gotten that down. It is wrong to assume that all cultures will benefit from "gender and development."
Ch. 5 Economic Locaations: Men, Women and Production
Setting: Kibala & Bukama, rural Chizela
Kinship commodoties:
"Hoe blades, metal cooking pots, water containers, blankets and ready made goods came to replace locally produced iron, clay pots, bark cloth, animals skins. Other new items introduced to society were bicycles, Bibles, and soap that became part of rural life." In the 1980s the cash economy started to grow because these new items became a necessary part of rural life. There was pressure between the market principles and kinship principles. For example, kinship-based flow of goods would include the ability to send a young child out for errands, or access to a killed animal for meat.
Roles were expected to be filled regardless of age and they were accepted at any skill level.
Men: clearing the bush, making the fields, built houses, fish & game
Women: day-to-day cultivation, kept house in order, cooked and fed her husband and family, beer
The marriage was based on interdependence. I noticed that women's roles were needed daily, and men accessed them on a daily bases whereas men's roles were more "project by project." Polygymy was common place and the more wives one had, the better one would eat. However the wives this was a disadvantage in some respect becauase she had to compete for her husband's attention etc. Divorce was straightforward, however it was avoided by older men. Divorced or single women could always return to her matrikin.
The author states that "what needs to be emphasized is that men obtained access to their basic staple food through women. Harvesting sorghum was a women's job, and if a young man was not married, he would not grow or harvest it because "'no one was there to harvest it." A man harvesting sorghum was seen to be demeaning for his manhood. Women lacked freedom of mobility as compared to men.
My thoughts: The distinction of roles in Zambian society can probably be found throughout Africa. The author documents their roles were clearly and I doubt that the Zambian people would "classify" themselves the way the author had. Her research had an anthropology feel combined with economics, and I guess the two are very closely related if we wanted to look at the kinship relations and market relations. In conclusion the two are intertwined and men are dependent on women and vice versa.
Zambia, prior to independence, was known as Northern Rhodesia. There was a significant prescence of missionaries who helped create a written language to write the Bible from the oral language Kaonde. Europeans discovered copper in the 1920s and began to exploit the nation for its rich minerals, solidifying a copper mining industry. There was a huge labor migration to urban areas for work and protests began in the 1930s. After independence, Zambia's infrastructure began to deteriorate. The North-Western province is sparsely populated and infested with tsetse flies, mkaing it difficult to keep livestock.
Crehan depicts Zambia through Gramsci's definition of the state: "The State is the entire complex of practical and theoretical activities with which the ruling class not only justifies and maintains its dominance, but manages to win the active consent of those over whom it rules." This chapter talks about kin relationships that create the political and relational power structures within society.
The author talks about kinship (the "imaginary community") and local authority as coinciding aspects of the political sphere. However to the people of Zambia, kinship was very important. In comparison to the West, we have "come to think of kinship and its obligations as occupying its own particular domain." The Kaonde kinship is based on matrilineal descent, meaning that a child will belong to the clan of his or her mother. There are 8 kinship "statuses" such as inanji (mother), mwisho (mother's brother) kolojanji (older sibling) nkasanji (younger sibling), mwana (child) mwipwa (nephew/niece) nkambo (grandparent) or munkana (grandchild). These are the roles that people in society identify with. The colonists found it odd that households were female-headed. Chiefs were also identified as "owning the land" and had "authority over everything that happened within their area" but when the author tried to clarify the chief's role, she found out that "the chief had nothing to do with soiety." This distinction between male and female roles is interesting because last week was a discussion about "Women in Development" and "Gender and Development." In some societies they already have a disctinction of roles and women even hold more power than men. Like the Koande, women carry the family name. Therefore sometimes devlopment discourse assumes that women are unequal and need to climb their way up to meet the level of a man's privelege, but some African socieites have already gotten that down. It is wrong to assume that all cultures will benefit from "gender and development."
Ch. 5 Economic Locaations: Men, Women and Production
Setting: Kibala & Bukama, rural Chizela
Kinship commodoties:
"Hoe blades, metal cooking pots, water containers, blankets and ready made goods came to replace locally produced iron, clay pots, bark cloth, animals skins. Other new items introduced to society were bicycles, Bibles, and soap that became part of rural life." In the 1980s the cash economy started to grow because these new items became a necessary part of rural life. There was pressure between the market principles and kinship principles. For example, kinship-based flow of goods would include the ability to send a young child out for errands, or access to a killed animal for meat.
Roles were expected to be filled regardless of age and they were accepted at any skill level.
Men: clearing the bush, making the fields, built houses, fish & game
Women: day-to-day cultivation, kept house in order, cooked and fed her husband and family, beer
The marriage was based on interdependence. I noticed that women's roles were needed daily, and men accessed them on a daily bases whereas men's roles were more "project by project." Polygymy was common place and the more wives one had, the better one would eat. However the wives this was a disadvantage in some respect becauase she had to compete for her husband's attention etc. Divorce was straightforward, however it was avoided by older men. Divorced or single women could always return to her matrikin.
The author states that "what needs to be emphasized is that men obtained access to their basic staple food through women. Harvesting sorghum was a women's job, and if a young man was not married, he would not grow or harvest it because "'no one was there to harvest it." A man harvesting sorghum was seen to be demeaning for his manhood. Women lacked freedom of mobility as compared to men.
My thoughts: The distinction of roles in Zambian society can probably be found throughout Africa. The author documents their roles were clearly and I doubt that the Zambian people would "classify" themselves the way the author had. Her research had an anthropology feel combined with economics, and I guess the two are very closely related if we wanted to look at the kinship relations and market relations. In conclusion the two are intertwined and men are dependent on women and vice versa.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Ch. 18 Journal
Gender and Development
"The distinction between (biological) sex and gender (with social and cultural origin) was increasingly being put into operation to challenge the existing social norms and positioning of men and women. This led to the problematizing of gender relations and the ways in which they impact development policies themselves. This approach, known as GAD (gender and development) has been taken forward and applied to a range of development policies and practices" (p. 390).
I think the distinction is important because it does have a different emphasis. It has shifted from "Women in development" (WID) to "Gender and Development" (GAD). Feminists in the 1970s wanted to challenge whether the category of women created a barrier that excluded them from development processes and they wanted institutions to rethink gender in the bigger context of development. Feminists and gender advocates saw that it was wrong to integrate gender into development planning by contextual interpretation of women's needs" based on her biological sex. It was time to rethink things and see them in terms of social and cultural contexts.
It's important for women of the North and the South to team up together to "achieve quality and dignity in their domestic lives as well as safety and respect" (p. 387).
The book says that there is a link between women and nature, and the 'ecofeminist' idea values motherhood as a very spiritual and a very productive calling. This concept is called "Women, environment and development" (WED).
Basically, we need to restructure the way we perceive gender and women's issues. Instead of separating the roles of men and women, we need to see both roles in the context of development, to see their social, cultural and economic relations as working towards a better and equal world. This means that we cannot ignore the 'masculinity' of men and men's role in development as well. With this restructuring, policy interventions require a gender analysis. GAD is a broader approach to address inequality in which men AND women both are partners in development.
Summary:
WED- highlights relationship women have with environment as main users and managers of natural resources
WID- focuses on women
GAD- focuses on gender relations and resource activities
gender mainstreaming- analyzing gender in all aspects of development, not only in women or women's issues and the insistence that gender issues should be placed at the heart of all development policies and practices.
"The distinction between (biological) sex and gender (with social and cultural origin) was increasingly being put into operation to challenge the existing social norms and positioning of men and women. This led to the problematizing of gender relations and the ways in which they impact development policies themselves. This approach, known as GAD (gender and development) has been taken forward and applied to a range of development policies and practices" (p. 390).
I think the distinction is important because it does have a different emphasis. It has shifted from "Women in development" (WID) to "Gender and Development" (GAD). Feminists in the 1970s wanted to challenge whether the category of women created a barrier that excluded them from development processes and they wanted institutions to rethink gender in the bigger context of development. Feminists and gender advocates saw that it was wrong to integrate gender into development planning by contextual interpretation of women's needs" based on her biological sex. It was time to rethink things and see them in terms of social and cultural contexts.
It's important for women of the North and the South to team up together to "achieve quality and dignity in their domestic lives as well as safety and respect" (p. 387).
The book says that there is a link between women and nature, and the 'ecofeminist' idea values motherhood as a very spiritual and a very productive calling. This concept is called "Women, environment and development" (WED).
Basically, we need to restructure the way we perceive gender and women's issues. Instead of separating the roles of men and women, we need to see both roles in the context of development, to see their social, cultural and economic relations as working towards a better and equal world. This means that we cannot ignore the 'masculinity' of men and men's role in development as well. With this restructuring, policy interventions require a gender analysis. GAD is a broader approach to address inequality in which men AND women both are partners in development.
Summary:
WED- highlights relationship women have with environment as main users and managers of natural resources
WID- focuses on women
GAD- focuses on gender relations and resource activities
gender mainstreaming- analyzing gender in all aspects of development, not only in women or women's issues and the insistence that gender issues should be placed at the heart of all development policies and practices.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
media for 4/26
"Nigerian Oil"- National Geographic Magazine
The photo on the front page of Port Harcourt is quite a sad sight to see. The pretty blue sky is stained with black smoke above crowded huts next to gray water. Nigeria is the most populated country in Africa and oil has caused "Nigeria has become a dangerous country, addicted to oil money, with people increasingly willing to turn to corruption, sabotage, and murder to get a fix of the wealth. The cruelest twist is that half a century of oil extraction in the delta has failed to make the lives of the people better. Instead, they are poorer still, and hopeless."
In and of itself, oil is a good thing. It brings the prospect of growth and financial wealth for the nation. It will bring in revenue and jobs to work at the gas plants. Oil is a blessing but also a curse for the people of Nigeria. It is an indirect cause of numerous environmental problems. Oil spills, polluted groundwater, ruined cropland etc. The fisherman talked about the effects of constructing the gas plant. Pipelines are being built through farmland and swamps, barreling through the wetlands. Acid rain now pelts the metal rooftops. Builders tore down the forest which used to protect the towns from the east wind so now the rains and winds destroy the Nigerians' rooftops. This may seem like an irrelevant, seasonal problem but when people need money to rebuild their destroyed houses, it takes a toll on the whole household, economically, financially, socially. People cannot even catch fresh fish... relying on imported frozen fish.
Quote: "With all the oil money coming in, the state doesn't need taxes from people. Rather than being a resource for the state, the people are impediments. There is no incentive anymore for the government to build schools or hospitals....I can say this," Osuoka said firmly. "Nigeria was a much better place without oil." We can see this "natural resource curse" throughout the developing world. For some countries the natural resource has been diamonds. Whatever the case, the natural resource has tremendous potential to boost the economy but the country is left in a horrible economic state, barely able to provide for its own people. It is very paradoxical but happens because rulers have divided interests. In the case of Nigeria, like the said, the government has no incentive to build schools, hospitals or maintain a stable infrastructure. As long as money is coming in, basic social necessities are being ignored.
Quote: "The oil companies, led by five multinational firms—Royal Dutch Shell, Total, Italy's Agip, and ExxonMobil and Chevron from the U.S.—transformed a remote, nearly inaccessible wetland into industrial wilderness. The imprint: 4,500 miles (7,200 kilometers) of pipelines, 159 oil fields, and 275 flow stations, their gas flares visible day and night from miles away." The article talked about how the first discovery of oil was prior to Nigeria's independence in the 1960s. Now, multinational firms are still "attached" to Nigeria. Their pipelines are increasing Nigeria's dependence upon richer countries. In a way, it's a form of post-colonialism. Ironic, but true. Big companies still want to get a share of Nigeria's riches, and none of the profits are benefiting the people.
The oil companies gave out cash to village chiefs or provided health clinics or water tanks to allow them to build a pipeline through their village. While this may seem like reasonable compensation to the oil companies, money doesn't solve everything. The article mentions how projects would be semi-completes and left useless, like incomplete schools, clinics without staff, water tanks without pumps. Providing cash will not put a bandage on the problems the villagers face. Oil is the cause of escalating violence from rebel groups in the area.
"Clinton Signs Oil Deal In Angola"- Reuters
USAID partners with Chevron (US) as a sign of reconciliation. She praises Angola for their rebuilding/peace efforts after 27 years of civil war and encourages them to schedule an upcoming presidential election because the president (in office for 30 years) She also encourages Angola to diversify its market to agriculture. She says the US is interested in investing in Angola's farming sector. This is all in the name of "development assistance" under the Obama Administration.
"America's New Frontier" -Al Jazeera
Question: Can Obama turn US-African relations in a new direction?
People don't know who is in the lead, the military or the state department. There needs to be a balance between diplomacy and defense. The global war on terrorism after the attacks of September 11th effected US relations with Africa, especially concerning oil. President Bush wanted to start getting oil from Africa. New interests in Africa. Competing for interests in natural resources with China.
Question: What role will Africom play and how did it came to be?
It was launched Oct. 2008 to establish "security, stability and cooperation" in Africa, support US policy and partner with US's military groups in Africa. Africa would be suspicious of Africom because of US's history... why would soldiers be involved? This is usually a case for diplomats and development workers. But according to the video it made sense in military terms, however people failed to ask Africa how they felt about it, of course. It seems like military imposition, building US military headquarters in Africa. Africa has a different view from the US, one of non-alignment, they don't want to work under any powers since it has colonial implications, so Africom's progress was downplayed. It's headquarters ended up being in Germany and the leaders in Washington D.C. Africom tried to play down the skepticism.
This Youtube video relates with Clinton's interest in Angola. Before watching this segment I was confused about the connection but after watching this, I understood better. US wants to increase its relations with Africa. Whether its through Africom (military) or USAID (developmental assistance), the US will try to increase its influence and partnership with the continent.
The photo on the front page of Port Harcourt is quite a sad sight to see. The pretty blue sky is stained with black smoke above crowded huts next to gray water. Nigeria is the most populated country in Africa and oil has caused "Nigeria has become a dangerous country, addicted to oil money, with people increasingly willing to turn to corruption, sabotage, and murder to get a fix of the wealth. The cruelest twist is that half a century of oil extraction in the delta has failed to make the lives of the people better. Instead, they are poorer still, and hopeless."
In and of itself, oil is a good thing. It brings the prospect of growth and financial wealth for the nation. It will bring in revenue and jobs to work at the gas plants. Oil is a blessing but also a curse for the people of Nigeria. It is an indirect cause of numerous environmental problems. Oil spills, polluted groundwater, ruined cropland etc. The fisherman talked about the effects of constructing the gas plant. Pipelines are being built through farmland and swamps, barreling through the wetlands. Acid rain now pelts the metal rooftops. Builders tore down the forest which used to protect the towns from the east wind so now the rains and winds destroy the Nigerians' rooftops. This may seem like an irrelevant, seasonal problem but when people need money to rebuild their destroyed houses, it takes a toll on the whole household, economically, financially, socially. People cannot even catch fresh fish... relying on imported frozen fish.
Quote: "With all the oil money coming in, the state doesn't need taxes from people. Rather than being a resource for the state, the people are impediments. There is no incentive anymore for the government to build schools or hospitals....I can say this," Osuoka said firmly. "Nigeria was a much better place without oil." We can see this "natural resource curse" throughout the developing world. For some countries the natural resource has been diamonds. Whatever the case, the natural resource has tremendous potential to boost the economy but the country is left in a horrible economic state, barely able to provide for its own people. It is very paradoxical but happens because rulers have divided interests. In the case of Nigeria, like the said, the government has no incentive to build schools, hospitals or maintain a stable infrastructure. As long as money is coming in, basic social necessities are being ignored.
Quote: "The oil companies, led by five multinational firms—Royal Dutch Shell, Total, Italy's Agip, and ExxonMobil and Chevron from the U.S.—transformed a remote, nearly inaccessible wetland into industrial wilderness. The imprint: 4,500 miles (7,200 kilometers) of pipelines, 159 oil fields, and 275 flow stations, their gas flares visible day and night from miles away." The article talked about how the first discovery of oil was prior to Nigeria's independence in the 1960s. Now, multinational firms are still "attached" to Nigeria. Their pipelines are increasing Nigeria's dependence upon richer countries. In a way, it's a form of post-colonialism. Ironic, but true. Big companies still want to get a share of Nigeria's riches, and none of the profits are benefiting the people.
The oil companies gave out cash to village chiefs or provided health clinics or water tanks to allow them to build a pipeline through their village. While this may seem like reasonable compensation to the oil companies, money doesn't solve everything. The article mentions how projects would be semi-completes and left useless, like incomplete schools, clinics without staff, water tanks without pumps. Providing cash will not put a bandage on the problems the villagers face. Oil is the cause of escalating violence from rebel groups in the area.
"Clinton Signs Oil Deal In Angola"- Reuters
USAID partners with Chevron (US) as a sign of reconciliation. She praises Angola for their rebuilding/peace efforts after 27 years of civil war and encourages them to schedule an upcoming presidential election because the president (in office for 30 years) She also encourages Angola to diversify its market to agriculture. She says the US is interested in investing in Angola's farming sector. This is all in the name of "development assistance" under the Obama Administration.
"America's New Frontier" -Al Jazeera
Question: Can Obama turn US-African relations in a new direction?
People don't know who is in the lead, the military or the state department. There needs to be a balance between diplomacy and defense. The global war on terrorism after the attacks of September 11th effected US relations with Africa, especially concerning oil. President Bush wanted to start getting oil from Africa. New interests in Africa. Competing for interests in natural resources with China.
Question: What role will Africom play and how did it came to be?
It was launched Oct. 2008 to establish "security, stability and cooperation" in Africa, support US policy and partner with US's military groups in Africa. Africa would be suspicious of Africom because of US's history... why would soldiers be involved? This is usually a case for diplomats and development workers. But according to the video it made sense in military terms, however people failed to ask Africa how they felt about it, of course. It seems like military imposition, building US military headquarters in Africa. Africa has a different view from the US, one of non-alignment, they don't want to work under any powers since it has colonial implications, so Africom's progress was downplayed. It's headquarters ended up being in Germany and the leaders in Washington D.C. Africom tried to play down the skepticism.
This Youtube video relates with Clinton's interest in Angola. Before watching this segment I was confused about the connection but after watching this, I understood better. US wants to increase its relations with Africa. Whether its through Africom (military) or USAID (developmental assistance), the US will try to increase its influence and partnership with the continent.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Ferguson Ch. 6, 7, 9
Ch. 6 "Livestock Development"
The Thaba-Tseka Project was to develop livestock. The project involved dividing eight controlled grazing blocks of 4,000 hectares each. Members of the association would be entitled to grazing privileges and their cattle that grazed on the the land would be healthier and heavier. Some benefits of these grazing blocks would be extension, research, seeding and fertilization (p.170).
The following were conditions to be part of the association:
keeping fewer but more quality animals
livestock was to be purebred
following recommended management practices
removing animals that did not qualify for the assoc.
Things started to go downhill when people (not in the association) cut the fence to let their livestock graze. When these cases were brought to court, it was ruled that the cattle association did not have the rights to the allocated grazing area. This was another problem of appropriation... the land did not belong to the people running the project. There were many other reasons why locals who qualified to be part of the association refused to join it. 1) locals did not want to say that the project was a bad idea, even though they all felt that way 2) it would be betrayal to their fellow friends if they joined because the land should be shared 3) locals were suspicious of the plan.
The project also wanted to control the movement of livestock and their grazing but the locals disagreed. It was feared that: "the government is trying to deprive us of our animals by forcing them into an area where they will be unable to find enough food, so they will die" (p. 177).
Here is a quote from the book: "the 'introduction' of livestock markets was itself expected to dramatically transform the way in which people held stock. It was imagined that the provision of market outlets for livestock would make it possible for the first time for stock owners, previously isolated from the cash economy, to evaluate their animals in terms of monetary profit and loss" (p. 179). Therefore the project set up auctions was the planners were pleased but Ferguson argues that this was not an improvement because auctions were set up by the government even before the project started since the 1950s. The project's aim to "stimulate" a livestock economy was not credible.
I found this quote interesting: "The idea that livestock could be raised on commercial principles was appealing to women because it challenged the Mystique and promised to make 'men's animals' an asset that could be freely manipulated to maximize household income" (p. 187). I wonder if the outcome of the project would have been different if women were in charge of the cattle. I guess it depends on the target audience and the amount of support in order for a project to work successfully.
Questions:
1) Would the outcome of the project have been different if local women were the target audience?
2) Would it have made a difference if the planners of the project were women?
* * *
Ch. 7 "The Decentralization Debacle"
One problem with the project was planners did not realize the effect of politics from their project. From our textbook, we know that "development" is always generally tied to government, so the project's attempt to decentralize power apolitically is not possible. Page 194 says that "bureaucracy becomes the vehicle for the exercise of a particular kind of power." This idea is seen through the Thaba-Tseka project because it tried to decentralize administration in the local district by coordinating all the "development" activities at the district level instead of dealing with the bureaucrats. The project also tried to influence policies at the district level because it was a quicker way to get more funds.
* * *
Ch. 9 "The anti-politics machine"
Even though there the project was deemed a failure there were some things that were beneficial. The government of Lesotho had a stronger presence in the area, gov. services became available, a post office, police station and immigration control office was built. There were other services such as extension, seed supply and livestock marketing, health officials who monitored childcare and nutrition. Also a stronger military presence in the area due to better roads.
Ferguson describes "development" as a "machine for reinforcing and expanding the exercise of bureaucratic state power, which incidentally takes "poverty" as its point of entry- launching an intervention that may have no effect on poverty but does in fact have other concrete effects" (p. 255-256). He talks about how development has unintended effects and that is why many people are still attracted to development projects despite a running record of failures. Ferguson says that any development project forms a coherent whole, it is an anti-politics machine. I'm trying to better understand what he's staying here: that the "development apparatus suspends politics from even the most sensitive political operations" (p. 256).
Questions:
1) From the quote that development "suspends politics from sensitive political institutions, what does Ferguson mean by political operations? Does he mean it's the government's job to handle poverty/development?
2) What do you think attracted the Canadians in tackling the Thaba-Tseka project in the first place? Do you think they were attracted to the notion that development was an anti-politics machine?
Ferguson Ch. 2 & 5
Ch. 2 "The Constitution of the object of 'development'- Lesotho as a 'less developed country."
I like the opening of this chapter that basically debunks the World Bank's Report that Lesotho has "bleak economic prospects" and was "so ill-prepared" (WB1975). The following is a list on page 26 the proof that Lesotho was in fact already established- just not in the same way that is measured by the WB.
factors in Lesotho's economy identified in 1910:
money economy
market for Western commodities
plough agriculture
cash/subsistence crops, wool production
airports, roads, schools, churches, hospitals, labor migrant system
In 1910 the area Lesotho stands today is called "Basutoland." Ferguson makes it clear that the WB's description of Lesotho is very inaccurate. He says academic scholars would think it was crazy to say that the country was "untouched" by modern economic development."
Ferguson says: "Academic scholars of Lesotho, of all stripes, acknowledge this transformation [in 1910]. Suffice it to say that it is almost inconceivable that a serious scholar of Lesotho's history could say that Lesotho in 1966 was 'a traditional peasant, subsistence society...' (p.27)
This makes me think about all the guidelines of the WB and how dangerous it is to see things from only one side. If development projects were always based on inaccurate perceptions of developing countries, I would be very skeptical of how helpful they really are and I would not just take information as it is given. When analyzing the state of a country, it is important to look at the history, culture and not only measure progress in numbers. This whole chapter goes on to analyze the rest of the WB's plan titled " Lesotho: A Development Challenge." Ferguson goes on to discuss the preamble and each section of the plan like "the setting," "human resources," "trends in the economy," and "wages," "government operations," "employment" etc.
On "sectors," Ferguson comments that all the sectors have no unity. He says they make no sense unless we see them NOT as a description of an economy, but as a list of things which might potentially be "developed" (p. 49). This would mean that agriculture, mining, water resources, manufacturing industries, tourism, public services, education and banking do not work in unity to make the nation function at its potential. I can see how Ferguson describes the sectors in disarray and how the development agency of the World Bank has a chance to interceded and help out.
I found it humorous that Ferguson (p. 55) compares hasty classifications of LDCs to the following:
(1) all banks have money
(2) every river has two banks; therefore
(3) all rivers have money
the development version is:
(1) poor countries are "less developed"
(2) less developed countries (LDC) are those which have not yet been fully brought into the modern economy; therefore
(3) poor countries are those which have not yet been fully brought into the modern economy
In conclusion to chapter 2, LDCs differ everywhere. The classification of Lesotho as a LDC shapes the way policies are formed and assistance programs are enacted within the country.
Ch. 5 "The Bovine Mystique"
This chapter studies the power, property and livestock in rural Lesotho and takes a closer look at the Thaba-Tseka Project. Cattle is important to people in Lesotho. They highly prize their cattle for religious, social and symbolic reasons. The Westerners saw people keeping their livestock as "backward"- why keep skinny cattle if you can sell them on the market and make some money for yourself?
The puzzling thing to "westerners" Ferguson calls "the Bovine Mystique." Even in times of drought, the Basutos refused to sell their livestock and if they sold for a high market price. People took such pride in their livestock that they would rather die. But it's not that the Basutos were ignorant. They understood the concept entirely. The bottom line was that livestock is not a commodity in Lesotho. Ferguson states that the Bovine Mystique is "the result of the fact that "livestock" is constituted as a special domain of property by cultural rules, the most important of which establishes a "one-way barrier" between the domains of money as livestock" (p. 147).
I think this concept was so surprising to westerners because we would sell our cattle if that meant saving our lives. But to the people of Lesotho, cattle was not people property that could be sold off so simply. This fact would have set an alarm off in my head that the cattle development projects was on slippery slopes. Since a Canadian agency drew up the plans for this, they may not have anticipated the HUGE failure that was to come, because they didn't understand the relationship between the people and their cattle.
I like the opening of this chapter that basically debunks the World Bank's Report that Lesotho has "bleak economic prospects" and was "so ill-prepared" (WB1975). The following is a list on page 26 the proof that Lesotho was in fact already established- just not in the same way that is measured by the WB.
factors in Lesotho's economy identified in 1910:
money economy
market for Western commodities
plough agriculture
cash/subsistence crops, wool production
airports, roads, schools, churches, hospitals, labor migrant system
In 1910 the area Lesotho stands today is called "Basutoland." Ferguson makes it clear that the WB's description of Lesotho is very inaccurate. He says academic scholars would think it was crazy to say that the country was "untouched" by modern economic development."
Ferguson says: "Academic scholars of Lesotho, of all stripes, acknowledge this transformation [in 1910]. Suffice it to say that it is almost inconceivable that a serious scholar of Lesotho's history could say that Lesotho in 1966 was 'a traditional peasant, subsistence society...' (p.27)
This makes me think about all the guidelines of the WB and how dangerous it is to see things from only one side. If development projects were always based on inaccurate perceptions of developing countries, I would be very skeptical of how helpful they really are and I would not just take information as it is given. When analyzing the state of a country, it is important to look at the history, culture and not only measure progress in numbers. This whole chapter goes on to analyze the rest of the WB's plan titled " Lesotho: A Development Challenge." Ferguson goes on to discuss the preamble and each section of the plan like "the setting," "human resources," "trends in the economy," and "wages," "government operations," "employment" etc.
On "sectors," Ferguson comments that all the sectors have no unity. He says they make no sense unless we see them NOT as a description of an economy, but as a list of things which might potentially be "developed" (p. 49). This would mean that agriculture, mining, water resources, manufacturing industries, tourism, public services, education and banking do not work in unity to make the nation function at its potential. I can see how Ferguson describes the sectors in disarray and how the development agency of the World Bank has a chance to interceded and help out.
I found it humorous that Ferguson (p. 55) compares hasty classifications of LDCs to the following:
(1) all banks have money
(2) every river has two banks; therefore
(3) all rivers have money
the development version is:
(1) poor countries are "less developed"
(2) less developed countries (LDC) are those which have not yet been fully brought into the modern economy; therefore
(3) poor countries are those which have not yet been fully brought into the modern economy
In conclusion to chapter 2, LDCs differ everywhere. The classification of Lesotho as a LDC shapes the way policies are formed and assistance programs are enacted within the country.
Ch. 5 "The Bovine Mystique"
This chapter studies the power, property and livestock in rural Lesotho and takes a closer look at the Thaba-Tseka Project. Cattle is important to people in Lesotho. They highly prize their cattle for religious, social and symbolic reasons. The Westerners saw people keeping their livestock as "backward"- why keep skinny cattle if you can sell them on the market and make some money for yourself?
The puzzling thing to "westerners" Ferguson calls "the Bovine Mystique." Even in times of drought, the Basutos refused to sell their livestock and if they sold for a high market price. People took such pride in their livestock that they would rather die. But it's not that the Basutos were ignorant. They understood the concept entirely. The bottom line was that livestock is not a commodity in Lesotho. Ferguson states that the Bovine Mystique is "the result of the fact that "livestock" is constituted as a special domain of property by cultural rules, the most important of which establishes a "one-way barrier" between the domains of money as livestock" (p. 147).
I think this concept was so surprising to westerners because we would sell our cattle if that meant saving our lives. But to the people of Lesotho, cattle was not people property that could be sold off so simply. This fact would have set an alarm off in my head that the cattle development projects was on slippery slopes. Since a Canadian agency drew up the plans for this, they may not have anticipated the HUGE failure that was to come, because they didn't understand the relationship between the people and their cattle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)