Full Plate or Clean Slate? Eco Imperialism vs Eco Friendly Development
In the past few months, I have often found myself in debates surrounding environmental issues. I’ve learnt a lot about the varied opinions of my African friends and where they stand on the Climate Change discourse that’s slowly taking center stage. In these discussions, I’ve discovered people who acknowledge it’s a problem that must be dealt with, climate skeptics who feel like it’s a hoax propagated by the left (specifically Democrats in America), and even others with a more religious perspective who believe that God will not doom his children to such disasters. The last group, who actually got me thinking the most, are those who feel like the whole environmental discourse is a neo-colonial and neo-imperialist view propagated by the West to cover up for their mistakes. The latter argument is based on the fact that Africans have other problems, and curbing climate change should not be added to our plate. These are not climate skeptics; they are simply people who believe that the West should clean up their own mess and leave us alone.
This point of view is not new. At international fora, governments of developing countries have come forward to make arguments concerning this. The Kyoto Protocol adopted in 1997 for the reduction of Greenhouse gas emissions exempted developing countries. Emissions from these countries were low compared to those of developed countries, and it was simply unfair to ask emerging economies to make the same sacrifices, seeing as developed countries built their wealth on these emissions. What’s particularly interesting is that China and India were amongst the exempted developing countries. It’s been over 20 years since the Kyoto Protocol was adopted, and guess who the world’s largest CO2 emitter is?- China
The concept of Eco imperialism
The term “Eco Imperialism” was coined by Paul Driessen, and the reasoning behind this term was that Western countries impose their environmental views on developing countries — with more concern for the environment than the lives of humans. The argument for this is that environmental principles limit the rate of development for these developing countries, and that Western countries in support of this wish to keep Africa ‘rural’ and underdeveloped. It’s hard to deny that most developed countries have grown on the back of Carbon emissions and environmental destruction, but to chart the Western “carbon-emitting” path to development would hit us hard.
Have you heard of the Environmental Kuznets curve?
The Environmental Kuznets curve is a measure of how economic development relates to environmental destruction. The simple reasoning behind this is that, countries’ economic development (through industrialization mostly) creates a negative relationship with the environment, but when a country reaches a certain level of development and has achieved a certain level of growth, their relationship with the environment becomes better. Basically, destroy the environment to a level of development, when you reach that point, you start taking care of the environment, and then other countries who are picking up a bit slower can chart the same path.
…Like a 4*400 ‘environmental destruction’ relay race.
An Afrocentric case for Climate Change Action.
Africa emits just about 4% of the World’s total. So if nature was just and fair and decided to pay every continent back in their own coin with regards to carbon emissions, the continent would suffer the least. Sadly, it doesn’t work that way. The effects of climate change are shared. Depending on where you are placed geographically, the effects may differ and some bear the brunt a bit more than others. In 2018 for example, Cape Town, South Africa experienced a terrible drought due to sparse rainfall, posing threats to agriculture and food production and creating generally unsanitary conditions in public restrooms. (not cool for one of the World’s major cities and tourist destinations) .
A report by the UN shows that temperatures are quickly rising in the Sahel region. This region, which is highly dependent on rain-fed agriculture is already facing food insecurity because of droughts.
We are generally the most vulnerable to climate change. Vulnerability is measured in terms of our level of exposure, sensitivity and ability to adapt to the harmful effects of Climate Change. I thought of 2 basic questions I would ask myself to put this vulnerability into perspective;
What is the lowest temperature you experience in your home country? (Is it relatively high?)
Has there been a natural disaster (flood, hurricane) in your country? How well was your government able to deal with it?
We are clearly experiencing the effects already, and to worsen the problem the West started creating for us will be, in my opinion, cutting off our noses to spite our faces.
Eco- friendly development
This is a golden opportunity to place ourselves in a leadership position as a low carbon energy producing region. This is not too far-fetched. Rwanda for example has planned a National Cooling Initiative for clean and efficient cooling by reducing the use of greenhouse gases. The Ghana bamboo bikes initiative presents an eco-friendly way of producing bicycles, and South Africa is moving towards renewable energy in its industrial sector. Furthermore, climate resilience initiatives have already begun to help individuals such as farmers adapt to the harmful effects of climate change by providing climate resistant seeds and alternative irrigation systems to prevent crop failure. Baby steps, but it is a start.
“ Vote for me, I’ll protect the environment”
When last did you hear an opposition party accusing the ruling government of inadequate attention to environmental policy in Africa? If we as a people became a tad bit more concerned about Climate Change, Governments might just take it more seriously. In democratic African countries that have periodic elections, there are always a myriad of national issues that are campaigned on; education, taxes, youth unemployment, etc. What about the environment? The more we continue to stir up these conversations, the more likely that change will come.
