Recognising nature as a legal person: the Whanganui River in New Zealand

The relationship between indigenous peoples and nation states is historically marked by conflict and oppression. The exploitation of natural resources, usually ignoring indigenous knowledge, feed into these conflicts,threatening the sovereignty, rights, culture and ultimate existence of indigenous peoples. The historical relationship between the state of New Zealand and the Māori has proved to be no exception. However, the 2014 Whanganui River Deed of Settlement is an exemplary attempt to protect the River, and its natural resources while respecting incorporating the long ignored voices of the local Whanganui tribes.

Conflict flows

The Whanganui River, home for a large proportion of Māori villages in pre-European times and regarded as taonga (special treasure), is sacred to the Whanganui Iwi Māori tribe and believed to have human traits. Prior to 1848 a substantial Māori population, which was dispersed along the Whanganui River and its major tributaries, enjoyed rights and responsibilities over it. This changed in 1848 when the Crown purchased 86,200 acres of land at Whanganui. The Crown proceeded to assert authority over the land and River within the area purchased and, as a result, faced Māori opposition, who asserted control over the rest of the area and continued to make use of the River.

Frequent conflicts arose between the Crown and the Māori. The River’s relevance as an important communication route motivated, in 1887, the inauguration of a steam-boat service, which was protested by the locals, who argued this would greatly affect fish and eel weirs population, their main food source. Only a few years later, by 1891 most fish and eel weirs had, in fact, been destroyed, and yet the boat services continued. Rights to extract and sell gravel from the River were equally protested by the Whanganui Iwi, who attempted to obstruct the River works, but were ignored by the Parliament. In 1903, the Coal-mines Act Amendment Act, without consultation with the Whanaganui Iwi, brought further misery, by declaring the beds of all navigable rivers to be vested in the Crown.

The Māori tribe continued to be voiceless throughout the 20th Century until the Whanganui River Māori Trust Board was established. It negotiated outstanding Whanganui Iwi claims for the settlement over the Whanganui River and, in signing the Deed of Settlement, the Crown recognised, amongst other things, “its failure to protect the interests of Whanganui Iwi, and the adverse effects and prejudice caused to Whanganui Iwi.”

Several settlements have, prior to the Whanganui River Deed of Settlement, recognised Māori conceptions of the environment, among them are settlements that relate to the Waikato, Waipā and Kaituna Rivers. The Waikato River settlement, for example, recognises that the River is an ancestor (tupuna) to the Waikato-Tainui and it possesses a life force.

The Settlement

On August 2014, and following numerous petitions to Parliament dating back more than a century, the Whanganui River Deed of Settlement (or Ruruku Whakatupua) was finally signed. Under the settlement, the Whanganui River is recognised as a legal person, granting the River rights, powers, duties and liabilities and “recognises the intrinsic ties which bind the Whanganui River to the people and the people to the Whanganui River.” Not only has Māori belief been incorporated into the Deed of Settlement but the River is also represented by two guardians (with advisors) who act ‘as one’: one is nominated by the Crown and the other one by the Iwi natives.

The Deed of Settlement helps ensure a more sustainable usage of natural resources by, for example, significantly limiting dredging from the riverbed. It also respects natural areas and traditional knowledge: S.3.3.3. states that Iwi and Crown guardians, working must “promote and protect the health and well-being” of the River within a framework of traditional Māori knowledge. Ensuring a less polluted River, not only helps to restore local ecosystems and balanced biodiversity, but it brings a significant impact on the ocean’s health as well.

This policy is not only vital for environmental and natural resources protection but it also recognises  the local community and its relationship with the State, and the local environment. Poverty and human rights violations are addressed through the redress of historic exploitation by the Crown and the development of the River that had taken place without Māori consent. The Crown also “recognises its failure to protect the interests of Whanganui Iwi, and the adverse effects and prejudice caused to Whanganui Iwi.” The historical oppression  by the Crown over the Iwi is also taken into account. By consulting and partnering with local tribes, the Crown provides an avenue to redress such atrocities and violations, where possible.

It must be noted, however, that this Settlement is only appropriate and well-adapted to the cultural values and traditions of the Iwi. Local inhabitants of other faiths don’t have their beliefs acknowledged within the Deed of Settlement. This means that the Deed does not have the neutrality of pluralism and secularism, which the New Zealand government displays elsewhere in its policies.

By electing guardians and advisors from the tribe and incorporating their beliefs, knowledge and practices, it further empowers the local Iwi. It also provides for public consultation and genuine engagement in its design and implementation such as the appointment of legal representatives who “must … develop appropriate mechanisms for engaging with and reporting to [local Māori] on matters relating to [the river]”. The Deed establishes a strategy group comprised of representatives of persons and organisations with interests in the Whanganui River. This includes the Iwi, local and central government, commercial as well as recreational users and environmental groups.

This Settlement is by no means the consequence of a fully healed relationship, both between New Zealand’s indigenous peoples and the State, and between humans and nature. However it is a cause for celebration. The burden of environmental degradation rests the heaviest on the shoulders of indigenous peoples, who are more likely to rely upon a healthy and thriving  environment and yet, perversely usually have little say, or few means of access in these matters. Hopefully policies like the Whanganui River Deed of Settlement can inspire Governments around the world to take action towards recognising and respecting indigenous knowledge, and the restorative capacity of healing nature and communities.

Seizing the Solar Energy Revolution in Tanzania

When Ajuna Kagaruki and her husband built their new house in Mabwepande, a suburb of Dar es Salaam in Tanzania, it was not an option to wait for the government to connect the area to the national grid. Instead, they decided to take action themselves in order to have electricity for their life with the three children. Today, a 120 kwh Solar Home System (SHS) lights the house, powers a TV and an iron and charges their mobile phones.

A. Kagaruki in front of her house with SHS. Image by Carmen Rosa

A. Kagaruki in front of her house with SHS. Image by Carmen Rosa.

“When we moved in here, there was no electricity. That was hard. My children were bored and the two older ones could sometimes not finish their homework in the evening.” Ajuna Kagaruki is 35 years old, works as a social welfare officer and on top of that, just accomplished her Master’s degree. Her husband is a lawyer. “Even though we had a nice house, we could not enjoy family life here, because it was dark when we all got home.” With this experience, Ajuna Kagaruki and her family are not alone in their country. In Tanzania, only 26% of households have access to the national grid. And only 11% of people in rural areas and 40% in urban areas have access to electricity at all.

Ajuna Kagaruki and her family changed this situation for themselves. A few months ago, they decided to buy a Solar Home System (SHS). While Ajuna knew about the technology before, she wasn’t convinced to install it, because she heard a lot of stories about bad services and technical problems. This situation is also very common in Tanzania. As there is a lack of expertise for the technology, a lack of trained employees as well as no quality standards for solar equipment, many installations fail or need intense maintenance. However, Ajuna Kagaruki came across one company, who was supposed to offer good and reliable after-sales service. “When the Mobisol technician explained me how the system worked, I was surprised how easy it is. I can actually handle it myself and if I need support, there is always a team to contact.”

A. Kagaruki and her daughter in front of the TV and solar battery. Image by Carmen Rosa

A. Kagaruki and her daughter in front of the TV and solar battery. Image by Carmen Rosa.

Mobisol was founded 5 years ago, starting in Arusha in 2011. In 2013, the company had hired 30 people and 500 customers across Tanzania. Today there are about 400 employees in the country (about 200 sale agents, 150 local technicians, training technicians and assemblers) and 37.000 customers. All employees are trained by Mobisol in their academy centers is Arusha, Mwanza and Mbeya. “Especially finding good sales agents is difficult. Technicians, we usually find through universities or vocational trainings”, says one Mobisol staff member. The SHS are designed for households and small commercial use and are based on a rent-to-own idea: After a down payment of 8%, the customer makes a monthly payment for a maximum of three years. If a customer does not pay the monthly rate, which is done through M-Pesa, the system is locked down. When the full amount is paid off, the customer owns the system and produces electricity for free.

While Ajuna knew about the technology before, she wasn’t convinced to install it, because she heard a lot of stories about bad services and technical problems. This situation is also very common in Tanzania. As there is a lack of expertise for the technology, a lack of trained employees as well as no quality standards for solar equipment, many installations fail or need intense maintenance.

Ajuna Kagaruki’s 120 kwh SHS costed the family 163.000 TZS (about 76 USD) for the upfront payment and about 70.000 TZS (about 32 USD) for the monthly payment. “I am enjoying the light in the evening, watching TV and having a charged mobile phone whenever I need it. My older kids can do homework also at home and sometimes they even bring their friends to play after school.”

The Tanzanian government is aware of the fact that energy is the prerequisite for development. “We want to tackle the challenges that so many people in our country are facing every day,” says Doto Mashaka Biteko, Member of the Tanzanian Parliament and Chair of the Energy and Minerals Committee. “Therefore, the government is aiming to provide access to 50% of the population by 2020.”  And Mwanahamisi Athumani Munkuda, Clerk to the Parliamentary Committee Energy and Minerals adds: “The parliament has allocated 53% of the national development budget – which is about 1.13 trillion TZ Schilling – for energy issues.”

Watching a TV running on solar power. Image by Carmen Rosa

Watching a TV running on solar power. Image by Carmen Rosa.

The National Energy Plan from 2015 unveils how this should be achieved and what the money should be spent for. “In fact, looking at the government’s strategy for enhancing access to electricity, it is mainly about expanding the national grid,” says Sixbert Mwanga, Head of Climate Action Network Tanzania (CAN Tanzania). “However, renewable energies provide a unique window of opportunity to transform the electricity production and supply of Tanzania. Examples from across the world actually show that a decentralized approach, based on off-grid and on-grid solutions, is much cheaper and delivers faster.” CAN Tanzania, in cooperation with the World Future Council and Bread for the World, is currently developing policy recommendations for transiting to 100% Renewable Energy as a mean to reduce poverty in the country.

Ajuna Kagaruki shares this experience: “The government says that the national grid will be extended to our area within the next 3 years. But I couldn’t wait that long to have electricity for my family. And now, even if we get connected to the grid, I would continue with our SHS, because by then, I will produce my electricity for free.”

Authors

Anna Leidreiter, Senior Programme Manager – Climate, Energy and Cities, World Future Council

Irene García, Policy Officer, Climate, Energy and Cities, World Future Council

A Conversation with Kehkashan Basu and Pauline Tangiora

Two women, one mission: Our Councillor Pauline Tangiora and our Youth Ambassador Kehkashan Basu are two inspirational women working to make the world a better place. As a Maori elder, Pauline has been a respected advocate for the environment and indigenous issues for decades in her native New Zealand. Kehkashan is an Indian-born, devoted youth activist living in the United Arab Emirates, frequently travelling across the world to mobilise other young people in the movement for a green future.

During our Annual General Meeting in Hamburg, the two women provided us with an insight into their lives, their work and hopes for the WFC and made one thing clear: You don’t need to become a full-time activist travelling the world to make a difference – change starts at home.

What can we do to make the world a better place?

Kehkashan: Everybody can start by practising a sustainable lifestyle in the simplest way possible, just trying to think about the environmental impacts of everyday activities. If people choose to learn more about sustainability and spread awareness, a lot of things can be done. This also means that people need to respect the rights of others and take their views and opinions seriously.

Pauline: People need to respect each other. That is the first thing we need to teach our children: To respect ourselves and those around us.  It is also important that children are respected by the adults around them. And your actions will probably depend on the environment you live in. I live in a rural area and we have to catch our water and save it. So, everybody could contribute by putting a tank up by their house to catch the rain water. When children come to my house, they don’t turn taps on just like that because they know that water is the life and power of humanity.

Tell us a little bit about what you do

Kehkashan: In 2012, I started my youth organisation called “Green Hope”, which has the objective to carry forward the legacy of sustainable development and green economy by involving the children and youth of my region and also worldwide. We conduct conferences, workshops and academies to educate young people about what they can do to get involved in the sustainable development agenda and how they can spread awareness in their communities. But we don’t just talk about it. We also run small community projects so they can learn by doing. And we spread awareness through music, art, dance and drama because we feel the message is passed on easier that way.

Pauline: Personally, I wouldn’t even call it work. I walk alongside, especially alongside young people. I enjoy hearing their thoughts and ideas – and they listen to mine. I think in such conversations, young and old people can define the problems in the world very clearly. People from my generation should remember that we don’t have all the wisdom just because we are older. We should talk with young people to learn what they want and what they think the future will bring. If we don’t do that, we lose something.

Do you think that women or men are more concerned about the environment or more sensitive towards sustainability issues?

Pauline: In our community, we work together – male and female. We don’t say men are doing things better than women. We thank everyone in our community. We need to make sure that this remains the essence of who we are. And we have had many, many international calls, even from Germany, asking: ‘What can we do, we have a problem’ and I would say: ‘You need to work together. Men and women.’

Kehkashan: I think it really depends on the person and I don’t think it’s gender-specific. I am talking from personal experience. My group has an equal number of guys and girls who are equally passionate about what we do. So I think it really depends on the person as a whole and not their gender.

The Rights of Children commission is doing a really great job to secure the rights of children through national policies and legislation, for example to increase child participation and environmental literacy.

What are your expectations of or hopes for the WFC?

Kehkashan: The Rights of Children commission is doing a really great job to secure the rights of children through national policies and legislation, for example to increase child participation and environmental literacy. I think continuing this work and involving more young people is going to make a big difference in the world.

Pauline: The WFC has a very important role to play in the world, as it is not just working to change things but to actively make them better. And that is important, as you can’t just say “we have to change something”; you have to make things better through concrete action.

What changes have you seen over the years?

Kehkashan: When I started getting involved in sustainable development I was 8 years old. When I was 12, I started my own organisation and I think that was a huge changing point in my life because I learnt that working with others is so much more enjoyable. We can do so much more together to get our voice heard – much more than when we work alone. Our voices together have a much greater impact on society; it is a better way to spread our message.

I often meet people who think we young people cannot make a change, just because of our age! But now, I think our voices have really been heard and we have been able to convince people that the opposite is true.

Pauline: I am trying to represent the views and the concerns of the indigenous people. I am a lonely voice for them. It’s my belief that many people don’t understand the desperate needs of indigenous people worldwide. We had 500 years of colonisation in the Americas, 250 years of colonisation in Australia and 175 without sovereignty of New Zealand. So, where do we start and where do we finish? The indigenous peoples are not asking for much although they have lost their lands, rivers and forest – which is still happening today, for example in the Amazon. So while colonisation is still continuing in this day and age, where is the public in the world looking at?

But there are some positive developments. We had no fish in our river, we had nothing. Still, the local people made an agreement with the government department of conservation and since then, they have been working together to fence off our fish. Now, even visitors want to walk up there to see it.

Indigenous people still have the knowledge, still have their way of doing things. Many of us grew up with a basic understanding of the water, the sky, the storms and the sunshine. Sometimes I feel very sad that many people don’t understand that, don’t see that. We have a lot to offer.

Achieving a world without nuclear weapons: the contribution of domestic and regional policies

The establishment of Nuclear Weapon-Free Zones (NWFZ) in the past has made invaluable contributions to global nuclear disarmament. The further spread of such zones as well as adoption of domestic nuclear prohibition and divestment policies can pave the way for multilateral solutions. The World Future Council has developed proposals on how to further foster nuclear disarmament through national and regional policies.

Nuclear weapons are a global threat which requires a global solution. However, domestic and regional policies can make a vital contribution to advancing universal nuclear disarmament. While the treaties establishing the existing regional Nuclear Weapon-Free Zones are well known and generally regarded as critical contributions to global nuclear disarmament (together covering 114 states), the instances of national nuclear prohibition legislation and nuclear divestment policies have not received the same amount of attention or, indeed, credit. This is unfortunate as these policies have advanced nuclear disarmament, can inspire other countries to follow suit and contain lessons for the global disarmament endeavour.

Between 2 May and 13 May 2016 the Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) met for a second round in Geneva to discuss proposals to take forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations for the achievement and maintenance of a world without nuclear weapons. The OEWG was established on the basis of a UN General Assembly resolution. Among the participants were numerous countries (though notably absent were all the nuclear-armed states), advocacy groups, research institutes, academic institutes and think tanks, including the World Future Council.

From domestic to international law – Stories of successful legislation

Some countries, such as New Zealand, the Philippines, Austria and Mongolia have banned nuclear weapons through national legislation. These policies have contributed to strengthening the nuclear prohibition norm and addressed specific security challenges.

Some of the laws contain innovative elements such as individual responsibility and extraterritorial application in the case of the New Zealand law, which prohibits New Zealand’s citizens and residents to manufacture, to acquire, to possess or to control nuclear weapons as well as to aid and to abet any other person to do so anywhere in the world. These aspects of the policy could be useful to multilateral efforts to criminalise nuclear weapons employment such as through the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court.

In the case of Mongolia, the country’s subsequent work to have its nuclear weapon-free status recognised and respected through acquiring assurances by the nuclear-armed states they won’t target Mongolia with nuclear weapons, means its policy is seen to have acquired the status of ‘Single State NWFZ’.

All policies contain elements and lessons that could be considered in the pursuit of similar policies elsewhere. The triggering effect of single countries building a regime of domestic regional nuclear disarmament law should not be underestimated.

For example, Belgium adopted national legislation banning landmines and cluster munitions as well as any investment in such weapons, before the international processes that would ultimately culminate in the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty and the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions had started. This demonstrates how domestic legislative initiatives can inspire, strengthen and shape the international processes that culminate in international disarmament treaties.

Banning investment in nuclear weapons

Divestment of landmines and cluster munitions producers has successfully been adopted in a number of countries. Divestment from corporations involved in the production of key components of nuclear weapons has not been pursued with the same vigour, though the Norwegian and New Zealand Government Pension Funds have implemented such schemes. More recently, the Swiss War Materials Act was revised to prohibit, inter alia, the financing of nuclear weapon producers. The effect of such divestment policies should not be underestimated. They contribute to stigmatising nuclear weapons and address the financial streams tied up in their production.

An interesting aspect of both nuclear prohibition and divestment policies is that they can lead to the democratisation of the nuclear disarmament debate, as they often originate from public movements and require legislators to become active on the issue. Furthermore, such policies can institutionalize nuclear disarmament expertise and commitment through the creation of organs committed to promoting policy objectives as well as become educational tools, both domestically and abroad. Perhaps most importantly, they offer a way for non-nuclear weapon states to take the initiative out of the hands of the nuclear-armed states, brandish their nuclear disarmament credentials, codify nuclear disarmament norms and in the process exert pressure on the possessor states.

Lifelong Canadian disarmament campaigner Douglas Roche has said that “the anti-nuclear weapons campaign is following the classic lines of other great social movements, such as the end of slavery, colonialism and apartheid: at first, the idea is dismissed by the powerful, then when the idea starts to take hold, it is vigorously objected to until, by persistence, the idea enters the norm of public thinking and laws start to be changed.” Countries should ensure they end up on the right side of history by adopting laws that strengthen and speed up the global effort to prohibit and eliminate nuclear weapons.

To learn more, explore the following links:

Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones

Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones or NWFZs are zones that have been established on the basis of a treaty or convention which are characterized by the total absence of nuclear weapons. Every state has the right and sovereignty to establish such a zone and to determine its frontier. An international system of verification and control guarantees compliance with the rules established. These zones must be recognized by the General Assembly of the United Nations.

 

Istanbul Convention: Check how your country is doing in our map

The Council of Europe Istanbul Convention is the most comprehensive international human rights treaty on violence against women and domestic violence. This legally binding instrument explicitly defines violence against women as a human rights violation and a form of gender-based discrimination and includes a strong emphasis on prevention and survivors’ rights. In addition to Council of Europe Member States, it can be ratified by the European Union and is open for accession by any State in the world.

The Istanbul Convention reflects a comprehensive approach covering the areas of prevention, protection (including provision of support services for survivors), prosecution, and coordinated policies. In addition to its focus on survivors’ rights and protection, it also encourages action over the longer term through prevention measures, and requires the establishment of specialised institutions, partnerships, substantial budget allocations and data collection to ensure effective implementation.

As of May 2016, more than three-quarters (42 of 47) of the countries that are Council of Europe members have signed the Convention and 22 of them have also ratified it: Albania, Andorra, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Turkey.

The European Commission proposed on 4 March 2016 the European Union’s accession to the Convention. The Istanbul Convention would become the second human rights treaty binding the EU, after the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The EU would accede to the Convention alongside EU Member States. As of May 2016, 14 Member States (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden) have already ratified the Convention. A further 14 Member States have signed it but not yet ratified.

Istanbul_Convention

Learn more about the Istanbul Convention in our booklet “Ending Violence against Women and Girls” and in our online database of sustainable policy solutions, FuturePolicy.org.

Coordinated Community Response to Domestic Violence: a workshop in Minnesota (USA)

Violence against women and girls is a global challenge that requires effective, comprehensive and immediate policy solutions. Recent data shows that at least 30% of women worldwide have suffered physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence,  confirming the urgency of the matter on a global scale. Fortunately, in some parts of the world, local initiatives and frameworks have already proven highly successful in tackling gender-based and domestic violence, which can serve as examples to the global community.

The “Coordinated Community Response (CCR) to Domestic Violence” implemented in Minnesota (USA) is one of those initiatives. Also known as the “Duluth Model”, the method has been successfully protecting women from domestic violence for more than 30 years. For this, it was awarded the 2014 Future Policy Award as the world’s best policy addressing domestic violence. In April 2016, our team travelled to Minnesota, US, to facilitate a workshop that aimed to spread this comprehensive policy to other communities.

The “Coordinated Community Response (CCR) to Domestic Violence” workshop brought together advocates, law enforcement officers, legal professionals and policy-makers from six different countries (Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Pakistan, Tajikistan, and Trinidad & Tobago) to explore and witness first-hand the key principles of CCR as it is being implemented in Duluth (Minnesota, USA). This method, also referred to as the “Duluth Model”, promotes cooperation of all relevant actors, such as police and probation officers, prosecutors, and NGO advocates, working to prevent and combat domestic violence. This coordination effort proves as a highly effective approach for the implementation of domestic violence laws and focuses on victims’ safety and offender accountability.

The workshop provided an extraordinary opportunity for participants to learn the techniques of CCR from its designers/founders/initiators – and in the community that has most successfully implemented it – and develop an understanding and framework from which to respond to domestic violence in their own communities.

The World Future Council (WFC) was a funding partner of this nine-day workshop, planned and hosted by Global Rights for Women (GRW), a Twin Cities based non-profit, and presented in partnership with Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs (DAIP) out of Duluth, Minnesota. The workshop took place from 28 March to 5 April 2016.

Workshop Report

WFC_2016_coordinated_community_-response_to_domestic_violence_a_workshop_in_Minnesota_USA

Report

Workshop details

  • 18 participants from six different countries (Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Pakistan, Tajikistan, and Trinidad & Tobago)
  • 68 hours of training, convening, observing and peer-to-peer exchange over 9 days
  • Three days of intensive training by the staff at the Duluth Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs (DAIP) in Duluth (Minnesota) and four days of training by Global Rights for Women’s legal experts in Minneapolis (Minnesota).
  • Observation opportunities: participants visited a 911 emergency communications centre, shadowed police officers responding to calls, attended domestic violence court hearings, met with prosecutors and probation officers, and observed men’s nonviolence group meetings.
  • The study tour also included meetings with parliamentarians, representatives from local authorities, law enforcement entities, judges and prosecutors, service providers and civil society organizations.
Workshop Agenda
PreviousNext
12345

Future Policy Award 2014

In 2014, the Duluth model was named the world’s best policy to address violence against women and girls by the World Future Council (WFC), UN Women, and the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU). Our Future Policy Award highlights the world’s best policy approaches to the most pressing political challenges that the global community is facing today. In 2014, the award was dedicated to celebrate the best laws and policies that contribute to ending one of the most pervasive human rights violations of our time: violence against women and girls.

Read more

 

Next steps

The World Future Council will continue to work with our partners to facilitate the transfer of knowledge between policymakers and their NGO counterparts and to support them in introducing the model in their communities.

Project partners

logo GRW (1)

GRW is a non-governmental organization that envisions a world where women’s human rights to equality and freedom from violence are fully realized.

DAIP duluth logo

The DAIP strives to end violence against women and promote victim safety through innovative training and institutional changes.

Author

Marta Sánchez Dionis, Policy Officer, Ending Violence Against Women and Girls, World Future Council

msdionis

Six priorities for Sponge Cities

International and Chinese experts got together in Beijing to discuss Sponge Cities in China and its relevant policy recommendations. But what can we actually learn from the discussion? Here are 6 key priorities that emerged.

The second session of the World Future Council Future of Cities Salons series was held in Beijing on 26th April 2016. The event titled “China-Germany Dialogue on the Sponge City: Resilient and Regenerative” allowed Chinese and international experts to come together and discuss the concept of the Sponge City in front of several members of the local press. The concept of the Sponge City has gained particular attention in China as an attempt to define an effective model to tackle, among other issues, the increase in inner city floods experienced by many cities in China. Extreme weather events, such as more intensive rainstorms, are actually expected to become increasingly frequent as a direct effect of climate change. Hence the urgency to find effective ways to deal with this growing risk.

Essentially, the Sponge city is designed to act pretty much like a sponge in the sense that during rainstorms it allows surfaces throughout the city to absorb as much water as possible. Currently cities are mostly impermeable systems that divert water into sewage drainages which often channel untreated water directly into local rivers (especially during high intensity rainstorms as only part of the water can be handled by the wastewater treatment infrastructure).  By regenerating and expanding its own freshwater eco-systems (rivers, lakes, urban wetlands, gardens, parks etc.) the Sponge city allows storm water to be absorbed by the soil, which also naturally purifies it and stores it as groundwater. This reduces the burden on urban sewage systems, and during extreme weather events, improves the capacity of the city to absorb water and as such decreases the risk of flooding.

Six Priorities for the creation of Sponge Cities

While the urgency to transform our cities into Sponge cities is increasingly clearer, key policy guidelines to facilitate and encourage the creation of Sponge cities remain to be defined. Below are the 6 key recommendations that emerged during the discussions.

  1. Adopt an integrated, whole-system thinking approach

During the discussion, all experts emphasized that sponge cities are not only about recycling rainwater, improving water management or simply preventing floods. As Professor Che Wu from the Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture of Beijing University pointed out, “The sponge city must achieve the goal of protecting water environment, water ecology, water resources and water security at the same time”. On the same line of thought, Mr. Li Hailong, Deputy Director of Eco-city Planning & Building Center of Chinese Society for Urban Studies, concluded that

“sponge city is about approaching the issues of natural protection, restoration and design of cities from the water regeneration perspective and from a macro-understanding of sponge cities”.

In essence, it is not about isolated solutions but about finding integrated, cross-sectoral solutions grounded on the understanding of the city as a whole, organic, integrated system embedded in its natural environment and its water ecosystem.

  1. Establish locally based laws and regulations

As pointed out by Professor Che, the construction of sponge cities is facing multiple challenges in China. The first major challenge is legislation. Without sound laws and regulations, the water issue cannot be solved effectively.  Professor Che is very much interested in learning more from other countries on this matter especially from the relevant legislations in Germany and the EU. Currently many new developments in Germany are not allowed to discharge sewage free of charge.  The question is whether this kind of charge-based model need the support of laws and who should be in charge of setting these regulations and charges (the city, the region or the national government?) In Germany, these kinds of regulation are mandated by local municipal governments and not by federal authorities.  These local legislations are formulated according to local conditions, therefore may vary considerably depending on the city. According to specific locally-based problems, every city will calculate the cost on the disposal of wastewater. Adopting local taxation based on sound local regulation is therefore warranted.

  1. Promote coordinated cooperation between city departments

Another key element essential for the effective implementation of sponge cities is coordination between different departments. Both Professor Che Wu and Mr. Li Hailong pointed out that the construction of a sponge city project in China needs the coordination of different departments, including the department of Water Resources, Environmental Protection and several other city departments. Furthermore during the construction phase, various types of data (such as weather data, geological data, etc.) also need to be gathered from different departments and need good coordination and communication across teams. Still, strongly separated departments pose a significant barrier to the effective and smooth functioning of this needed integrated, cross-silo approach.

  1. Find Innovative ways to raise financial resources at the city level

Funding and financing problems are an inevitable part of city planning and construction. Mr. Li Hailong analyzed in depth China´s plans to develop sponge city through Public-Private-Partnerships (PPP). However, such model can only bring limited benefits and can only attract a few companies, which unavoidably causes funding difficulty. All of the speakers highlighted that China should adopt a model which takes into consideration the different local conditions, and cannot view PPP as the only funding way. Different cities should select different economic strategies concerning their varied natural conditions and economic situations.

  1. Tailor the design to local conditions and regional potential

A careful assessment of local conditions and potential should form the base of any sponge city intervention. It is essential to carefully assess specific problems in the city and solve these by leveraging the local potential and regional resources. Standard conceptual recommendations for the development of sponge cities are applicable more or less to any climate and soil, hwoever the selection of specific interventions should be based on local conditions. Professor Che Wu compared sponge city projects in different areas of China and concluded that “China implemented many similar projects over the past 20 years following the same concept but using different implementation strategies in different projects. An implementation strategy might prove very successful with certain types of building and soil conditions, but cannot be transferred in a standardized way to another context, as it might not prove as successful as local conditions change”.

  1. Improve international dialogue and exchange of best practices: “foreign stones may serve to polish domestic jade”

Many best practices are available from where we can learn. An open dialogue and exchange of solutions across cities worldwide will be essential to accelerate the transition and the spreading of most effective solutions. The challenges discussed in the salon can only be tackled within an environment of continuous learning based on sharing of experiences and tested solutions.  Only through such sharing and active learning effort we can promote effective development of sponge cities in China.

Authors:

Filippo Boselli, Policy Officer, Climate, Energy and CIties, World Future Council, Germany

Zhou Ying, Communication and Operations Officer, World Future Council, China

What Tanzania can learn from Bangladesh on energy access

“I have a dream of empowering 75 million people of Bangladesh through Renewable Energy Technologies”. This is how, back in 1996, Dipal C. Barua, now founder of the Bright Green Energy Foundation, decided to start expanding RE in Bangladesh and make the country the first solar nation of the world by 2020.

By then, the country faced a serious energy crisis. Only 30% of the 162 million people of Bangladesh had access to electricity. Supply was hardly reliable. Overall demand for electricity was rising by about 10 per cent annually. Infrastructure was deficient, poorly managed and could not reach many rural areas (where 75% of the population lives) due to inaccessibility and remoteness. Therefore, most of the energy needs were met by biomass for cooking and kerosene for lighting (Sea4all, 2012).

Today, the country has installed more than 4 million Solar Home Systems (SHS) in off-grid rural areas, benefiting over 25 million people and wiping kerosene for lighting off the map. At present, over 60.000 SHS are being installed per month. The country has gained the capacity and knowledge of assembling all components of SHS in its territory, with more than 100.000 green jobs. Children’s evening study time is reported to have improved, as well as the health of households members. Businesses are rising due to longer hours and more varied options of income-generation activities. And no kerosene is used for lighting. SHS has become affordable at the price of kerosene thanks to innovative financing schemes allowing for 15% down payment to install the 15w-to-85w packages system, and the remaining 85% to be paid in 12/24/36 monthly installments (Bright Green Energy Foundation, 2016).

Bangladesh_Tanzania_study_tour2This is astonishing for Bangladesh, a low-income country in which over 40% of its population lives below the international extreme poverty line of $1.25 per person per day (UKgov, 2014). Nevertheless, Bangladesh successfully managed to grasp the nettle and make a decisive step towards RE deployment as a means to provide widespread energy access and foster socio-economic development. As the Energy Adviser (Minister) to the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Mr. Tawfiq-e-Elahi Chowdhury highlights: “Bangladesh used its courage and imagination to break barriers and increase Renewable Energy”.

This was not a smooth journey. As Dipal C. Barua stresses out, there were many challenges, such as limited or no access to finance; lack of skilled manpower; lack of proper financial model design to make SHS affordable; lack of awareness about the clean and environment friendly energy sources; and more important, there was a lack of national energy policy. The fact that Bangladesh was blessed with over 300 days of direct sunlight made him, nonetheless, embrace solar energy as the best solution to (em)power the population of Bangladesh.

“When the Government of Bangladesh saw that Solar Home Systems overpassed the 1 million in rural areas despite the absence of a political framework, they realized how serious the renewable energy pathway was to increase electricity access”, states Barua. Indeed, in 2000, the Government of Bangladesh issued its Vision and Policy Statement to bring the entire country under electricity by the year 2020. And because of its cost-competitive nature, this goal was being implemented in rural areas almost exclusively with the use of SHS.

According to Dr. Khan, professor at North-South University in Bangladesh: “Renewable energy off grid solutions were taking care of the poorest sectors of the population because they do not have the means to live where modern services are”. In response to these developments, 2008, the Ministry of Power, Energy and Mineral Resources of Bangladesh set a renewable energy policy to create an enabling environment and legal support to encourage the use of renewables. By virtue of this policy, the Sustainable and Renewable Energy Development Authority (SREDA) was established as a focal point to support the development and promotion of RE through policies, laws, rules and regulations relating to sustainable energy and through constant multi-stakeholder consultation. For Mr. Alauddin, Joint Secretary, Power Division, Ministry of Power and Mineral Resources “If you want to bring in a new technology, you also need an institution that has the skills, capacities and mandate for this. This is why we established SREDA”.

Bangladesh_Tanzania_study_tour3For the financing, a government-owned financial institution, the Infrastructure Development Company Limited (IDCOL), played a critical role by providing its support through grants and loans to RE private and non-profit implementing organizations. Up to this day, only in SHS, IDCOL has invested more the $600 million and the agency is calculating that another 3.5 million SHS can be installed within next few years. Further, IDCOL is supporting bio-gas based power projects, solar-mini grid projects, solar irrigation pumps, and biogas pumps to move the country faster in RE deployment and have a significant impact on national GDP.

This experience is highly valuable to many countries that find themselves in similar situations. Tanzania is one of these countries, which is why the World Future Council, together with CAN-Tanzania and Bread for the World organized a study tour to Bangladesh on April 17-23, 2016 with a group of 10 members of Parliament, government decision-makers and civil society leaders in the field of renewable energy  looking at strategies to rapidly expand first time access to electricity among its citizens with 100% RE.

“Let’s work together not to reinvent the wheel, but to see the different nature of the wheel”, as Mr. Malik, Executive Director and CEO of IDCOL highlighted when addressing the Tanzanian delegation. In Tanzania, 67.87% of the population lives below $1.25 a day.

This situation is compounded by the low level of electrification, where only 7% of rural population and 39% of urban population have access to electricity. In turn, lack of access to modern energy services exacerbates poverty due to persistent limited production opportunities and social facilities. But Tanzania, as Bangladesh, is endowed with abundant, high-quality renewable resources, which could play a significant role in meeting the county’s energy needs through off-grid solutions.

Bangladesh_Tanzania_study_tour1Today the African country is already ripping the socio-economic benefits of pilot projects being implemented by actors such as Tanzania Traditional Energy Development Organization (TaTEDO), and there are companies such as Mobisol which have installed more than 40.000 pre-paid SHS in Tanzania and Rwanda. But Tanzania can perform much better and at larger scale. “This study tour changed my mind about the potential of Renewable Energy as an effective tool to provide energy access to all people”, said one of the members of the Tanzania parliament after exploring the RE projects in rural off-grid areas of Faridpur, Madhukhali and Kustia, in Bangladesh.

When exchanging thoughts and experiences with Bangladeshi RE stakeholders, such as the Bangladesh Ministry of Energy, SREDA’s Chairman or the Director of Renewable Energy Limited, all participants concluded that this trip has just opened doors and is the start of a long journey of collaborations and working together. “In fact, we need to bring the experience from Bangladesh to Tanzania, especially on developing a comprehensive finance model for individual households and communities.”

Authors

Irene Garcia, Policy Officer, Climate, Energy and Cities, WFC
Anna Leidreiter, Senior Program Manager, Climate, Energy and Cities, WFC

Cities must be Regenerative. But what kind of Regeneration are we actually talking about?

It is not just about the regeneration of natural resources but it is also not just about what is commonly reffered as urban regeneration. As the term regenerative appears more and more within the international discourse on cities, clarity over its actual meaning is paramount.

The term ‘regenerative´ is becoming increasingly popular in the discussion around sustainable urban development and especially relevant now as it gets frequently mentioned within the UN discourse leading up to Habitat III. For example, the term has recently been re-adopted in the official document of the UN World Urban Campaign as one of the 10 final Principles of The City We Need 2.0.  The 6th principle explicitly states that “The City We Need is Regenerative and resilient”. The terms is also mentioned several times throughout this document as well as in other UN preparatory documents towards Habitat III such as the final Policy Paper 8 Urban Ecology and Resilience.

But what does Regenerative actually mean?

While the ultimate aim of a regenerative city is to be able to regenerate the natural resources that it absorbs, it is important to highlight that the concept is in fact much broader and comprehensive. It is therefore important to clarify the types of Regeneration that we would  see in the Regenerative City. In summary, we can say that the concept embraces 4 key types of regenerations, all extremely important for the effective implementation of the Regenerative City.

4 Fundamental Regenerations

  1. Regeneration of Resources (from Linear to Circular Flows)

Regenerative urban development seeks to mimic the circular metabolic systems found in nature. This will require a switch in paradigm away from the old linear metabolism (which allows cities to operate within an isolated segment of the resource cycle) to a new circular metabolism. This will mean closing the urban resource cycle by finding value in outputs that are conventionally regarded as waste and using them as resource inputs in local and regional production systems. For example, all the energy the city consumes needs to be able to be naturally regenerated by natural processes. For this reason, renewable energy is considered the only viable energy sources for regenerative cities, as it is continuously available and does not involve the consumption of a finite stock such as fossil fuels. Similarly all the material goods the city needs are not discarded into landfills but are kept in the resource loops by being upcycled, recycled, reused or by becoming a useful input in another processes such as energy production processes.

  1. Regeneration of Natural Capital and Urban Ecosystems (From Consuming to “Prosuming”)

The Regenerative city is not only conceived as a consuming entity, but actively contributes to the production of the resources it needs and to the restoration of the natural capital and ecosystems from which it depends. For example, food supplies are complemented through urban agriculture (including vertical agriculture), energy through solar rooftops, geothermal and bio-waste, and water through storm water collection at the block level and by allowing urban aquifers to be replenished through water percolation across the extensive green and permeable areas in and around the city. This enhanced ecosystem service infrastructure within the urban area improves the city’s self-sufficiency as well as its resilience. For example, increasingly relying on urban agriculture and on food from the immediate hinterland improves self-sufficiency while extensive greener areas provide benefits in terms of pollution mitigation, CO2 sequestration, water retention, natural filtering for cleaner urban aquifers, flood resilience etc. Similarly, relying on renewable energy sources from within the city or from the immediate surroundings increases the city’s resilience to energy prices fluctuation and dependency on imports. In addition, the regeneration of the productive capacity of the city and its ecosystems will lead to a renewed, enhanced relationship between cities and their hinterland and between urban and rural areas.

  1. Regeneration of Urban Spaces (from Sprawled to Dense)

Rather than sprawling and expanding on virgin land, regenerative urban development is about creating denser cities by redeveloping and regenerating the existing urban fabric and existing neighbourhoods (instead of simply developing new sites from scratch). Increasing density has in fact huge benefits in terms of efficient use of energy, resources, infrastructures and transport. At the same time, the focus of urban regeneration projects should be on making cities more people-centred, increasingly functional for the community, more accessible and inclusive and at the same time able to positively enhance the natural systems of the city and of the surrounding areas. Retrofitting and renovation projects are prioritized while at the same time historical and cultural heritage is also conserved and revalued. Enhancement of urban ecosystems is prioritized and it is achieved by making sure the city is rich of green areas and vegetation that, for example, help to block shortwave radiation, cool the ambient and create more comfortable urban microclimates. The latter can be highly beneficial, particularly given the risks of increase in temperature due to global warming. Improving urban ecology, promoting bioremediation of degraded areas and flora regeneration are also essential and have benefits beyond the environmental ones as they also increase the liveability and aesthetic value of the city.

  1. Regeneration of Communities (from Passive to Active Engagement)

Local communities and local businesses are themselves regenerated,revitalized and strengthened by becoming the actual leaders and drivers of all the regeneration projects taking place in the city. Citizens are constantly engaged and are encouraged to take part in the decision-making processes and community-based activities within the city. The informal sector, local youth and marginalized groups are also involved. For this purpose, it is crucial to establish a policy framework that promotes greater citizen participation, facilitates the processes of collaboration among stakeholders and of coordination across levels of governance and actively supports innovation and formation of new activities, locally based projects, start-ups and community initiatives. All of these processes contribute to the creation of a more dynamic, lively, people-centred and inclusive urban reality.

By Filippo Boselli, Policy Officer – Climate, Energy and Cities.

Q&A: The Marshall Islands’ Nuclear Disarmament Cases

Oral hearings on the preliminary phase of the nuclear disarmament cases brought by the Marshall Islands against India, Pakistan and the United Kingdom took place at the International Court of Justice in The Hague from 7-16 March. Members of the World Future Council have been involved in this unprecedented legal action since its launch in 2014 and some were present during the oral arguments at the Court. This Q&A, created by the Nuclear Peace Foundation,  explains the cases.

What is the source of the International Court of Justice’s legal authority?

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It was established in 1945 by the UN Charter. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands. The Court’s role is to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized UN bodies and agencies. The Court’s 15 judges are elected by the UN General Assembly and the Security Council.

Which countries are the Marshall Islands suing, and why?

The Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) has a unique and devastating history with nuclear weapons. From 1946 – 1958 the United States conducted 67 nuclear weapons test explosions over the Marshall Islands, the equivalent of 1.7 Hiroshima-sized bombs daily for 12 years. Castle Bravo, the largest bomb ever tested, was 1000 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. Birth defects never seen before and other radiation-related health effects continue to plague the Marshallese people.

On April 24, 2014 the RMI filed individual Applications in the ICJ instituting proceedings against the nine nuclear-armed States: the U.S., Russia, the UK, France, China, India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea. The RMI contends that each of these States is in breach of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and/or customary international law to end the nuclear arms race and to engage in negotiations on nuclear disarmament.

Article VI of the NPT states: “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.” The UK is a founding member of the NPT, which entered into force in 1970. The U.S., Russia, France and China are also nuclear-armed members of the NPT; nuclear-armed India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea are not. The RMI joined the Treaty in 1995 as a non-nuclear-weapon State and in turn received the binding legal promise of the States parties to the Treaty, including the nuclear-armed States.

In a 1996 Advisory Opinion, the ICJ issued an authoritative interpretation of Article VI and recognized a parallel customary international law obligation, concluding unanimously: “There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.” This Opinion is not limited to NPT members; it applies to all States.

No negotiations on nuclear disarmament have ever been initiated and all of the nuclear-armed states are currently engaged in programs to modernize and qualitatively improve their nuclear arsenals, with an eye toward their indefinite retention. India and Pakistan are also engaged in quantitative arms racing.

Why were hearings held only in the cases of the UK, India and Pakistan?

At this time, only the UK, India and Pakistan – among the nuclear-armed states – accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ. The other nuclear-armed states were invited to respond to the Applications submitted by the RMI. China declined; the others did not respond.

What was the scope of the hearings?

This stage of the cases was limited to preliminary objections. The UK and India claimed that they have strong records of support for nuclear disarmament, arguing therefore that there is no dispute for the Court to adjudicate. The RMI countered that actions speak louder than words, citing the UK’s consistent record of voting against nuclear disarmament resolutions in the UN General Assembly and its plans to replace its Trident nuclear weapons system. With respect to India and Pakistan, the RMI cited programs underway for expansion, improvement and diversification of their nuclear arsenals. The UK and India also argued that the cases cannot proceed without other states possessing nuclear arms being before the Court; that the relief requested would be ineffective; and that various exceptions to their declarations accepting the jurisdiction of the Court apply, excluding jurisdiction.

Pakistan withdrew from participation in the oral pleadings at the last minute, declaring it had nothing to add to its written submission.

What will happen next?

The ICJ will issue separate rulings in each case, probably within three to six months. If the Court rules in favor of the RMI, the cases will move to the merits phase and more written arguments and hearings will be scheduled. If the Court rules against the RMI in any case, that case will be over.

What relief is the Marshall Islands seeking?

The RMI is asking the Court to declare that the UK is in violation of its obligations under Article VI of the NPT and customary international law by failing to pursue in good faith negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament, by taking action to qualitatively improve its nuclear weapons system and to maintain and modernize for the indefinite future, and by failing to pursue negotiations that would end nuclear arms racing. The RMI also requests the Court to order the UK to take all steps necessary to comply with its obligations under Article VI of the NPT and under customary international law within one year of the Judgement, including the pursuit of negotiations in good faith aimed at the conclusion of a convention on nuclear disarmament under strict and effective international control.

The RMI is asking the Court to declare that India and Pakistan are in violation of their obligations under customary international law, by failing to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament, by failing to pursue negotiations on cessation of the nuclear arms race, and by engaging in the quantitative buildup and qualitative improvement of their nuclear forces to maintain them for the indefinite future, contrary to the objectives of nuclear disarmament and cessation of the nuclear arms race. The RMI also requests the Court to order India and Pakistan to take all steps necessary to comply with its obligations under customary international law with respect to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and nuclear disarmament within one year of the Judgement, including the pursuit of negotiations in good faith aimed at the conclusion of a convention on nuclear disarmament strict and effective international control.

The RMI is not seeking monetary compensation in these cases.

Where can I get more information?

A. General information about the cases is available at: nuclearzero.org. Written submissions by the RMI, UK, India and Pakistan, and verbatim records of the oral pleadings are posted at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3 Videos and photos from the oral pleadings are posted at www.icj-cij.org/multimedia.