MDG Goals at the mid point of fifteen years

Indepth op-ed on MDG's Goals at the mid point of fifteen years, published in Jansatta, on June 29, 2007.

By- Amit Dwivedi

Condition of Crop Insurance in UP

Indepth op-ed on Condition of Crop Insurance in UP, Published in 'Voice of Lucknow' India's National news paper.

June 19, 2007

By- Amit dwivedi

'We are likely to see growing water scarcity'

Climate change: 'We are likely to see growing water scarcity'

June 06, 2007

How will climate change transform India? What should Indians do in our everyday lives to lessen the impact of global warming?

Rediff.com's Nikhil Lakshman asked Dr Rajendra K Pachauri, Chairman, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, what India and Indians need to do to counter the terrors of global warming. The third in a five-part series of interviews:

Part 1 of the Interview: 'Climate change reports have not been diluted'
A lot of young people seem to be absolutely aghast at the consequences of global warming. Would you outline for them the immediate and long-term implications of climate change?
Well, all these have been documented in the report itself and I would encourage people who have a concern to read the report in detail. You know the issues that we need to consider are the fact that today you have enough observed evidence to show that the climate is changing. We also have enough observed evidence to show that the bulk of this change is taking place because of human activity.

We can separate out very neatly those effects which are caused by nature -- and these could be sunspots, these could be volcanic activity -- and those activities which are human induced. So we can say now on the basis of scientific research and very sophisticated modeling activities exactly what the separation between these two drivers is. I think that's very, very clear.

We now find that there is more than a 90% chance that all the warming that has taken place in recent decades is the result of human action.

We have also made projections for the future, which show, for instance, there will be major precipitation changes. We also know that there will be major temperature increases and the impacts are not going to be uniform. There are some countries that are far more vulnerable than others, some regions where the impacts will be quite severe.

In the case of, say, the Indian subcontinent, we certainly are likely to see more extreme precipitation events. We are likely to see growing water scarcity. We know our glaciers are melting very rapidly. And that's likely to cause very serious problems at least for the northern part of the subcontinent.
Part 2 of the Interview: Climate Change: 'The science is first rate'
Will the Himalayan glaciers truly melt?

Look at the rate at which the glaciers are melting. There is enough documentary evidence, there's visible evidence. You don't even have to measure anything. You can see it taking place.
Sea-level rise is a reality and you know we need to be concerned about it. We have a large coastline. Agriculture is likely to be affected adversely.

So you know these are issues that are clearly going to have major implications for human activity across the globe and it is important for people, particularly those who are in the younger age group, to worry about some of these issues and start taking both adaptation measures as well as ensure that on a global basis, we can bring about effective mitigation of emissions of these gases.

So is this change universal?

Well, a good part of it really is because even if we had stabilised our emissions during the year 2000, climate change would continue for several decades. As a matter of fact, sea level rise, which really has the longest time scale, will continue for centuries. So we have to adapt while we may bring about action to mitigate emissions.

But you think we need to adapt to climate change as well as mitigate its consequences?
Absolutely. You need to do both. One or the other will not work. You need both.
What adaptation can we do in India?

Water management. We need to manage our water resources far more efficiently. Make sure that every drop of water, at least in economic activities, is used effectively.

I mean simple things like the kinds of toilets that we have over here, they are terribly inefficient in the use of water. Everywhere else in the world they have come up with designs that are far more efficient. With urbanisation and the demand for water growing in urban areas, these are things that are going to be critical.

In agriculture, we waste enormous amount of water, in industries we need to recycle water. There is a lot that can be done in the case of agriculture.

We need to come up with very location-specific solutions and how we may be able to counter the impact of climate change. Otherwise, agricultural yields will decline.
What about the energy scenario?

Well, there you really need global responses and global solutions. India is a very small part of the emissions problem. Even though our share is growing, it's still very, very small. I think action has to be taken first by the developed countries and I think that's absolutely critical. It is essential.

The European Union is trying to tackle climate change. The Bush administration, for long averse to taking any action, has finally stirred. What about India?
The government has to take the lead. We have to come up with a game plan, we have to come with a roadmap about what we need to do about climate change and, of course, predominantly it has to be an adaptation-based plan of action.

The number of cars that are on the roads is ridiculous. We have to think of a totally different plan of transport as opposed to what has been followed in the developed countries. It doesn't suit our conditions, locally or globally. So you know these are things that have to be thought through and you know we have to articulate them.

Has the government consulted you on what needs to done? The finance minister mentioned the constitution of an expert committee on climate change in his Budget speech. It has been a couple of months since and there has been no movement.

I haven't heard anything but you know on a regular basis we (The Energy Research Institute of which Dr Pachauri is the director-general) work very closely with the ministry of environment. We provide them regular inputs in the negotiations, in defining their own position as far as climate change is concerned. We have a good relationship in terms of providing advice and analytical inputs to the government.

online available at- http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/jun/06inter.htm

'Climate change reports not diluted'

'Climate change reports not diluted'

June 04, 2007

Not too many Indians are aware that at the heart of the global debate on climate change is an Indian. Dr Rajendra Kumar Pachauri is chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, established by the World Meteorological Organisation and the United Nations Environment Programme, to investigate global warming and its consequences for Earth.

This year's IPCC reports have startled world leaders out of denial mode. No longer, it appears, can climate change be dismissed by policy-makers as a monstrous crank theory conceived by a renegade scientific community.

At this week's G-8 summit in Germany, climate change and the threat it poses to the future of humanity will be one of the main subjects of discussion, treated almost on par with that other horrific challenge to the way we live, terrorism.

In an extensive interview to rediff.com's Nikhil Lakshman, Dr Pachauri -- who heads the The Energy and Resources Institute in New Delhi and is arguably India's leading enviromental scientist -- discusses the IPCC reports and what we ordinary folk need to do to preserve our planet from the dangers of global warming. A week-long series:

Are you satisfied that this year's IPCC reports have adequately conveyed the consequences and dangers of climate change?

I think they have because there has been an enormous amount of interest on the part of the media, and as a result I am sure our message and the essential findings of the reports have been conveyed widely across the world.

I feel generally satisfied but then this is only the start of a process which has to continue because let us face it, people have very short memories and right now, of course, the reports may create a bit of a stir. But over time people will forget about it and it will be business as usual. We have to think of some means by which one can keep reinforcing the message effectively.

Would you have been happier if the reports had been presented in the form they had been drafted by the scientists, because if you look at the American newspapers, for instance, there has been a lot of criticism about the way some countries watered down the conclusions?

No, I don't think they watered it down. The whole process of the IPCC is such that the summary for policy-makers is approved literally word by word by the governments. They (the government) have the immediate right to ask questions about every finding, every single piece of assessment that is contained in the reports.

The authors (of the reports) are present there and they have to answer those questions. They have to provide references, they have to provide a basis for why a particular conclusion has been arrived at. Often, to be quite honest, the kinds of suggestions that you get from the government representatives actually improves the quality of the reports.

So what we are really getting is a reality check on the part of the people who are involved in policies. And there are two benefits, one which I said you provide something in the report that is totally defensible and if it is not defensible then the authors decide to drop it. Secondly, I think what happens as a result is that you get a buy-in from the governments.

Once a government has approved a report then they necessarily have to accept ownership of it. Therefore, when it comes to any follow-up, no government can deny accepting the IPCC report. Because acceptance has been ensured through the process. So I don't think it (the IPCC reports) were watered down. Yes, there are always some modifications, and that is why we discuss these things for a period of four days or longer, which happened in this case.

Please describe to us the days leading to the presentation of the reports and the all-night discussions between the scientists and the policy-makers and your role in bringing about a satisfying conclusion.

Basically, you go through every sentence, line by line, you go through every word literally and as we go around the text, then people are free to discuss, debate, question what is there in the draft report. Then you sort of change it online if there is a need to do so. And since it is line by line you are talking about a 20, 21 page report.

Obviously, it takes all of four days and in this case it took longer because we worked right through the night. There were a few tricky issues and there you run into differences of opinion.

You then set up what is known as a contact group and that contact group meets outside sessions. And people who have very strong views about a particular issue participate in this contact group and we try to come up with any resolutions of any differences that arise.

How many countries were involved in this?
I think in Brussels, we had 114 countries.

And how many scientists?

There were the coordinating lead authors. I would say maybe 20, 25 which is the representative of the total number of scoentists who participated in the report.

And the policy-makers who took part in these discussions were also well informed individuals?
Oh yes! Because you know we go through a process of reviews of the draft. The drafts are sent out to governments and to experts for their review. And these are governments who have read the drafts, send in their comments and are totally familiar with the text. So essentially they are people who know what they are talking about.

So you wouldn't agree with the criticism that countries like China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and the United States actually diluted the report?

I wouldn't want to name any countries but you know there are always some countries are always a little more active than others. I don't think there has been any case, so I wouldn't use the word 'dilution'.

If you can't really find cogent reasons for defending what you have said, then clearly you just have to drop it. But what I'd like to say is that there has been no material change or alteration in the report as such. There might be some minor things that have changed but the basic thrust of the report has remained just as it was.
I read that some scientists are so displeased

with the process that they have vowed not to be involved in IPCC discussions again.

I said elsewhere -- it was reported also -- that after you have a 24-hour session literally, and at the end of it, somebody asks me, "Would you work for the IPCC again?" my instinct would be to say, "To hell with it! I am not interested." It is strenuous, it is a tough process and obviously people do get flustered, they lose their cool, they lose their tempers so if somebody walks out and says that they'll never work for the IPCC again, it really doesn't mean very much, it doesn't amount to anything.

In some sense you can say it's a lover's tiff, nothing more than that.
As chairman of the IPCC, what is your role?

The co-chairs of the working groups essentially run the meetings. I am there only to facilitate things if we run into any problems, if we run into any difficulties. I am there to understand what kind of roadblocks are coming in the way and how one might be able to remove them.

The overall IPCC meeting I chair myself. When the synthesis report is presented, which will be in November, I would chair that meeting so I will be at the receiving end.

With the working group report, it is the co-chairs of the working group who are the ones responsible for producing that report so they are the best ones to handle that session and defend everything as far as that report is concerned.

So, you are essentially a builder of consensus?

I am there to see that the process moves along established lines and if we run into any problems I'd like to see that we sort out those problems.

online available at- http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/jun/04inter.htm

Status of Farmers in India

Indepth op-ed Article on Status of Farmers in India in Voice OF Lucknow India's National News Paper.

By- Amit Dwivedi

4 June, 2007

Indians bag Gwangju HR prize

Scoop, Newzeland

Central Chronicle, Bhopal , MP
9 May 2007


Opinion- Indians bag Gwangju HR prize

The 2007 Gwangju Prize for Human Rights has been jointly given to two Indians this year. Dr Lenin Raghuvanshi from People's Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (PVCHR) in Varanasi (UP) and Irom Sharmila from Manipur state.

This is the first time that Indians have figured in the recipient list. The past recipients include Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, the NLD General Secretary in Myanmar, Xanana Gusmao, President of East Timor; Basil Fernando, Executive Director of Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong; Korean Association of Bereaved Families for Democracy, South Korea; and Dandeniya Gamage Jayanthi, Monument for The Disappeared, Sri Lanka.

The Gwangju Prize for Human Rights Award was established to celebrate the spirit of the 18 May 1980 Gwangju Uprising by recognizing both individuals, groups or institutions globally that have contributed in promoting and advancing human rights, democracy and peace in their work.
The prize is awarded by the citizens of Gwangju in the spirit of solidarity and gratitude from those whom they have received help in their struggle for democratization and search for truth. It is hoped that through this award the spirit and message of the May 18 will be immortalized in the hearts and mind of humankind.

Dr Lenin Raghuvanshi has put up vehement resistance against the caste system, supported advocacy initiatives of torture victims in 5 northern states and brought hope back to the minds of more than 3,500 bonded child laborers and those suffering human rights infringements prompted by the caste system, especially to the untouchables.

The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) enacted in 1958, which is operative at the time of a 'suspected' riot(s) in order to 'maintain public order', allows killing by shooting, entering and search of property, and arbitrary detention, etc., its abuse is currently spawning grave human rights violations in some parts of India. Under the powers of AFSPA, on 2 November 2000, the Indian military opened fire on its own citizens in the state of Manipur. Since then, Irom Sharmila, a resident of the tragic state, has refused to eat and drink anything in resistance to indiscriminate use of the AFSPA against civilians.

The response of the Indian government to her resistance has been repetitively evasive: the government has arrested her on a charge of 'attempted suicide', force-fed her and then freed her under applicable law, but, up until now, has failed to provide any fundamental alternative to the law in question. In October 2006, Sharmila left Manipur for New Delhi, the capital of India, at the peril of her own life, to facilitate the accomplishment of the goal of her 6-year-long struggle, i.e. the abolishment of the AFSPA.

However, her daring mission was brought to an abrupt halt when she was arrested by the New Delhi police on her second day in the city. Currently, she is in custody at Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital (RMH).

In recognition of their efforts to improve human rights in India , the 2007 Gwangju Prize for Human Rights Selection Committee has selected Lenin Raghuvanshi and Irom Sharmila as co-recipients of the award.

This award carries a prize money amounting to US$ 50,000, a gold medal and a certificate, and ceremony will be held in Gwangju City, Republic of Korea to mark the 27 th anniversary of 18 May 1980 Gwangju Uprising.

"Over the years, I have been very involved in and worried about the situation of marginalized children. In 1993, with Swani Agnivesh, I founded the Bachapan Bachao Andolan (Save the Childhood Movement) and in 1996 the People's Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (PVCHR) was born to reeducate children who were forced to work" said Dr Lenin.

Lenin Raghuvanshi has become a symbol for millions of Dalits fighting for their dignity in India. His approach to the struggle constantly puts the person at the centre and urges respect for the human dignity of all people belonging to India's lowest castes.

The work of Lenin Raghuvanshi marks a shift in the Indian movement for human rights; he is one of a relatively few activists who insist that caste-based discrimination goes against democratic principles. In Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh - one of the most traditionalist, conservative and segregationist regions in India - Lenin, with a few resources but plenty of confidence and determination, has managed within a short time to bring the problems facing marginalized people to national and international attention.

In 2004, to give voice to those who are marginalized, the Jan Mitra Gaon' was born, also known as 'People-friendly village'. This is a pilot project in which Lenin adopted three villages and a slum, where plans include reopening an elementary school, abolishing forced labour, making education for girls obligatory and spreading non-traditional education. There is no elementary education in vast rural areas but the PVCHR has opened educational centres for children in 45 villages.

"Thanks to the intervention of the PVCHR before international and national fora," says Raghuvanshi, "we have managed to put hunger on the agenda of government priorities.

Bobby Ramakant

online available at- http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0705/S00177.htm

http://www.centralchronicle.com/20070509/0905305.htm

Don't Forget Workers on Intetnational Labor Day

May 1 2007

View- Don't Forget Workers on Intetnational Labor Day

By Bobby Ramakant Public Health Writer

Today (May 1, 2007) as the world observes International Labour Day (or May Day), countless millions of workers on the frontlines of unorganized sector toil hard completely oblivious of today's significance. How is it possible to usher in a change for social justice when those most under-represented are not engaged and their voices not heard, especially today?

THE SEOUL TIMES went to capture concerns of most under-represented voices.

International Labour Day is observed to pay homage to the workers who had laid down their lives for Labour rights in Chicago on 1 May 1886. It commemorates the historic struggle and efforts of working people.

One doesn't have to go very far from India's capital New Delhi. Employees of a company called Wow Information Solutions Private Limited have alleged that their employers (especially Mr Sohrab Khan, Human Resource Manager) are threatening them on emails and phone, so as to dissuade them by intimidation from asking their dues like salary, form-16 or provident fund papers. Rajeshwar Ojha and Vishal Anand, two ex-employees of this company while showing copies of threatening emails, say that Mr Sohrab Khan has even denied Form-16 to them.

Moving away from the India's capital Delhi to a village Lalpur in Hardoi district, people voice similar concerns. Ram Babu, a native of Natpurwa village, said that despite of the fact that National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) promises 33% of job cards to women, only 12 women have been able to get job cards under NREGA out of 10,000 job cards distributed so far. When people of these villages conducted a social audit in end of November 2006, they uncovered massive irregularities in the muster rolls. Money was shown to be paid for many days (at the rate of Rs 58 per day) in names of people who weren't even aware of such a scheme leave aside getting work or money! During the social audit the workers got to know that the actual due wage is Rs 58 per day, whereas they were being paid arbitrarily anything between Rs 30-40 per day before.

Chandralekha, who hails from Natpurwa village, infamous for 350 years old sex-work trade in Hardoi district, laments that despite of lobbying for more than 7 years, she got no response from authorities. Most of the population of natpurwa village will qualify to get BPL (Below Poverty Line) cards and therefore be entitled to get free rashion from public distribution system (PDS) under Antodaya Scheme. In reality, not even a single person has got BPL card or rashion supply under antodaya scheme so far in Natpurwa.

This is a dangerous trend, where we do have special days on calendar like International Labour Day, but while observing May Day today forget to involve the most important stakeholder – the workers' themselves. With vast majority of people working in unorganized sector, it becomes all the more important to raise awareness about rights of these workers so that they are not subjected to abuse or exploitation, says Dr Sandeep Pandey, noted social activist and recipient of Ramon Magsaysay Award 2002. It is also important to provide security to these workers, like landless farmers for example. If they stop growing food, what will we eat then, asks another activist Mahesh Kumar of Kanpur.

A senior government official on condition of anonymity says that it is a huge challenge to talk of rights and regulations in unorganized sector. Not only corporate powers are slowing down the process, but also those whose vested interests are at stake. Real democracy and end of feudalism will only happen when we are able to restore dignity of life for every landless labourer, said he.

Let's hope the policy makers are listening!

online available at- http://theseoultimes.com/ST/?url=/ST/db/read.php?idx=5239