The Future of Sustainability in Southeast Asia

In previous blog posts I have focused on issues ailing the Southeast Asian region in the past and present. This concluding post will deviate from its predecessors, instead focusing on the future of this vibrant, yet rapidly changing area.

The hurdles and challenges facing the people, governments, NGOs, and international agencies in Southeast Asia are countless. Nearly every aspect of development in this region needs reform in order to veer onto a sustainable path. While I have spent extensive time detailing environmental problems such as dams in the Mekong, fishery collapses, and deforestation, these large scale events are largely unfelt by the average global citizen. Take for example the havoc being wreaked on coral reefs in the region. In the Gulf of Thailand and the Andaman Sea, coral is beginning to bleach and die in response to rising sea temperatures and changing climatic conditions. One local source details, “If the temperature rises to 30.5 [degree Celsius] in the Gulf of Thailand and 28 [degree Celsius] in the Andaman Sea, bleaching is likely to happen,” (Wipatayotin). While the need is clearly urgent, the average person is not directly or immediately felt by the loss of coral reefs and its ecosystem service. How far will it take then to have these environmental disasters felt by and trigger response from the average person?

While environmental degradation is not felt significantly now, it is incorrect to say that it is having no impact. In fact, nearly one in four deaths are due to environmental factors like air, water, and soil pollution, with the “most environmentally-linked deaths [happening] in Southeast Asia, which accounted for 3.8 million such deaths in 2012,” (“Deaths in SE Asia”). Southeast Asia, whether it is the cause of degradation or not, is facing the brunt of the consequences. To the average Western consumer sitting at their computer, life continues uninterrupted, but to the individuals living in these regions, the changes they are encountering are only the beginning. Ultimately, a combined effort of NGOs, national governments, international agencies, and local stakeholders are needed to prevent the situation from getting worse. However, if the West fails to realize, assist, and pay for the harm its people and society is having on regions like Southeast Asia through avoidance of climate change accountability, then it is painstakingly up to national governments in Southeast Asia to save their own people. Eventually, Western officials who refuse to acknowledge delivering assistance will be forced to deal with similar problems in a few decades, however by then the damage will be impossible to mitigate.

Governments in Southeast Asia have typically been slow and unresponsive to ideas of sustainability and green technology as a source of energy. Natural gas, coal, and oil dominate the market, leaving renewables like solar and wind for small-scale village electrification. In fact, “The region will need more resources for itself as it develops further.

Graph detailing the amount by which each sector accounts for in Southeast Asia’s energy consumption.

There will be fewer surpluses for export. This is already the case for oil,” (Symon 241). In another instance the paper states, “With urbanization and growing incomes, motor vehicle ownership has risen rapidly. In Manila… the number of cars has doubled every seven years,” (Symon 243). Clearly, as the region grows economically and in terms of population, energy resources are going to be needed in greater demand. With a system in set for more coal, natural gas, and oil imports and production, there is little room or incentive for renewables. This is the time when governments and organizations like ASEAN need to push for sustainable initiatives and energy. If these governments are not capable of establishing a precedent for sustainable energy and independence now, then once resources become strained and populations and economies grow, there will be no room for switching to green technology.

Map detailing which regions are vulnerable to climate change, with a greater numerical value equating to more vulnerability.

While the outlook for energy independence in this region looks bleak, sustainable ideas and programs are appearing throughout Southeast Asia. As aforementioned in previous posts, tourism has the potential to place power in indigenous people while developing local economies. However, tourism also has the potential to be environmentally destructive, with the industry accounting for 5% of global carbon dioxide emissions through pollution and waste (“UNEP”). When used effectively, countries and local people can make huge economic gains, as described “in the Galapagos Islands and Palau, [where] visitors pay an entry tax to protected areas,” generating over $1.3 billion in Palau annually since 2009 (“UNEP”). The future success of ecotourism is one that requires collaboration with local people, organizations, and governments in order to ensure that the actions committed are in fact sustainable and supporting indigenous groups and conservation.

The future of sustainability in Southeast Asia is one that remains contingent on a variety of political stakeholders, two of those being the current global powerhouses China and the United States. With increasing Chinese influence, the United States has begun to intervene and divest leadership in these nations in order to remain sovereign. The idea of whether this is an American ploy to dominate the region is another debate, but one thing is clear, Southeast Asians are going to feel an increasing pressure from outside forces. As one article describes, “Southeast Asian nations are reluctant to choose sides, wary about being wed as pawns in a geopolitical struggle between superpowers,” (Nakamura). The theory has historical basis, with Korea and Vietnam serving as reminders of geopolitical struggles. The only solution is for global independence to be established, whether that be regional security through the ASEAN or security on a national basis, free from global powers. While establishing security, Southeast Asian nations would be in a position to launch and create sustainable agendas such as energy independence and environmental programs. Doing so would enable freedom from the oil and energy market while decreasing the need for reliance and influence from superpowers like China and the United States.

While Southeast Asian nations play an interconnected role in the global world as both exporters and importers of goods, the nation’s composing this region are at a crucial fork. An opportunity exists for these nations to become independent, free of influence from larger political entities, generating policies and development projects based on their specific economic, social, and environmental needs. Therefore, the future sustainability of this region is not bleak, but one filled with optimism that local groups, national governments, and international organizations can collaborate to promote independent, sustainable livelihoods, addressing the key issues facing the largest environmental crises of the 21st century.

References:

“Environment to Blame for 3.8 Million Deaths in SE Asia since 2012, WHO Finds.” Malay Mail Online. Malay Mail Online, 15 Mar. 2016. Web. 11 Apr. 2016.

Nakamura, David. “Obama Welcomes 10 Southeast Asian Leaders to California Summit.” The Washington Post. The Washington Post, 15 Feb. 2016. Web. 11 Apr. 2016.

Symon, Andrew. “Fuelling Southeast Asia´s Growth: The Energy Challenge.” ASEAN Economic Bulletin 21.2 (2004): 239-48. JSTOR. Web. 11 Apr. 2016.

“Harnessing the Power of One Billion Tourists for a Sustainable Future.” United Nations Environment Programme. United Nations Environment Programme, 5 Nov. 2014. Web. 11 Apr. 2016.

Wipatayotin, Apinya. “Andaman Coral Reef Sites May Close.” Bangkok Post. Bangkok Post, 10 Apr. 2016. Web. 11 Apr. 2016.

Blog 3: The Dandora dumpsite

The issue of climate change stems from many independent factors, one of which includes degradation of our planet. This week I want to focus on the environmental and land degradation that is occurring at the Dandora dumpsite in Nairobi Kenya. This dumpsite is not only impacting climate change but also the people in the area in many ways. Governing Global Desertification a book about land degradation and poverty discusses how, “land degradation usually has the greatest effects on the poorest, who depend on the land for their survival, and this can lead to a vicious downward spiral of poverty and land degradation” (Johnson et al). This is the case for these people in Nairobi living near the Dandora dumpsite.

Nairobi is a city of 4 million people and without an organized waste management plan all their trash goes into a 30 acre dumpsite on the outskirts of town near the slums. As you could imagine this excessive pileup of garbage, “has polluted the soil, water and air directly affecting more than 200,000 people in surrounding settlements” (Concern worldwide). The dumpsite has led to many health issues for those living in the area. There are large amounts of respiratory issues in the area, and an overwhelming number of people with high concentration levels of lead in their blood. Quite simply, “these poor communities, while contributing the least to the problem, are bearing the burden of an environmental catastrophe” (Concern worldwide). Overall the Dandora dumpsite is harming the health of those living nearby and this is an issue because they are the people who want the dump to stay.

The Dandora dumpsite has many legal troubles making it illegal to operate, but due to lack of waste management plans Nairobi has had no other option but to keep dumping the city’s waste. To the poor living in the surrounding area, this is great news because they are the ones who use it. Anywhere between 6,000 and 10,000 people scavenge the dump for recyclable items that they can sell to make a living off of. It’s a tricky situation because, “the mountains of garbage that sustain them are also endangering their lives and those of their children” (Pulitzer center). What is more important, removing the Dandora dumpsite to take care of the health and environmental issues at hand or keep the dumpsite so the poor can scavenge and make a living which they wouldn’t be able to do elsewise? Getting rid of Dandora would hurt the financial stability of many people who relied on the site for a livelihood including one scavenger, Tiger, who said, “They don’t recognize us as people. They don’t care what happens to us, and if they relocate this place, then we will have nothing” (Pulitzer center). What Tiger deserves to see is the Kenyan government initiate the clean-up of the dumpsite but also provide jobs for those who need them and are relying on the dump. With no waste management plan, the ideal solution would be to create one and employ these people in a waste management program and recycling center, and Nairobi is on their way towards initiating this.

According to a local newspaper from December 31, 2015 the Nation Youth Service (NYS) took control of the Dandora dumpsite and were subcontracted by City Hall at a cost of 5 million Kenyan Shillings (50,000 USD) to clear the dumpsite before the end of the season. The NYS plans to do this using youths from around the area who had once scavenged, only now they will be paid 500 Kenyan Shillings (5 USD) a day which is double what they made before (Nairobi news). This isn’t the ideal course of action for those 6,000 scavengers and there was no information on their thoughts in the newspaper but at least the government is tackling one of the issues.

This is an interesting subject to study because it isn’t what we are used to learning about in the case where the poor would prefer to improve their health and environment conditions by reducing land degradation. But here the poor are feeling like they need to risk their health in order to make a living picking through garbage. They were willing to sacrifice their environment and health in an attempt to survive. The solution still isn’t solved and there still remains a major issue with what is going on in Nairobi. What the city needs now is a program to develop and initiate jobs for those who were digging through trash a year ago living off just $2.50 a day. Jobs in the waste management sector should be considered first, as an attempt to start a recycling and waste program for the city of 4 million. Clearing the Dandora dumpsite is a major first step but there is still plenty more to be done to reduce the poverty which at the moment is growing.

 

Works Cited

“Https://www.concern.net/resources/trash-and-tragedy-nairobi-city.” Concern Worldwide. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2016.

Johnson, Pierre-Marc, Karel Mayrand, and Marc Paquin. Governing Global Desertification: Linking Environmental Degradation, Poverty and Participation. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006. Print.

“Kenya Poor Cling to Dump Site.” Pulitzer Center. N.p., 30 Apr. 2012. Web. 31 Mar. 2016.

“NYS Take over Dandora Dumpsite in Bid to Solve Garbage Crisis – Nairobi News.” Nairobi News. N.p., 31