The rich and poor of environmental wars

http://www.npr.org/2015/11/04/452555878/deep-in-the-amazon-an-unseen-battle-over-the-most-valuable-trees

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/06/140627-congo-virunga-wildlife-rangers-elephants-rhinos-poaching/

Despite more awareness of climate change and wildlife conservation this decade, rainforests and elephants are being destroyed at higher rates recently (maybe you also heard about the Indonesian peat fire that has blanketed SE Asia in smog, driven by deforestation to make room for corporate palm oil plantations).

But unlike pollution, habitat/species destruction may not be reversible. By some estimates, elephants will be gone in the wild in a few decades, at present hunting rates. Recent laws have slowed Brazilian deforestation, but globally we are still losing ~100K acres/day (mostly in Bra., Indo., and Africa).

When I was a teen, I knew species like elephants and forests like the Amazon were under threat, but I never imagined that they could totally disappear in my lifetime. The Amazon is so large and remote that it won't be totally wiped out, but we might lose enough to tip the climate change scales past the point of no return (deforestation is responsible for ~15% of total greenhouse gases due to burning/rotting, and disappeared forests can no longer absorb CO2). It's really scary.

So what is going on at the ground level? As you would expect, it's poor desperate people pitted against each other. In Brazil, indigenous forest communities tap rubber plants sustainably for their meager livelihoods. But others are paid by illegal logging operations to cut those trees down (mostly for export to the US). The Bra. gov't doesn't have the resources/interest to patrol the huge swaths of forest. So the "defenders of the forest" take up outdated arms to keep the loggers at bay and protect their way of life, but more of them keep coming and the trees are cut down much faster than replacement saplings can mature.

On the other side, economically marginalized Brazilians with few skills/prospects feel like they have no choice but work for illegal loggers to feed their families. They know it's wrong, but what choice do they have in that situation? When it comes to stealing vs. letting your baby starve, and the corrupt/uncaring gov't offers no solutions, what choice do they have?

Similarly in Africa, poorly paid/trained/equipped rangers are fighting a losing battle to protect elephants 24-7 (a daunting bodyguarding task) from the multiplying bands of poachers (who are getting more and more sophisticated). But these poachers are not getting rich either; they might fetch $100/kg from ivory smugglers, but the end product sells for ~$2K in China. They're just the foot soldiers fighting and dying over a luxury product that they will never use (same applies to rainforest hardwood, or some narcotics for that matter). $100/kg is relatively lucrative for the poachers, but the benefits wane when you consider the physical and legal risks they take. Again, they have very little education and other viable economic options, and live under gov'ts that are not able to lift much of the populace out of poverty.

We might pay more attention to the front-line fights because those are visceral and Hollywood-esque, but of course the root causes are less exciting and the economic perpetrators are not held accountable. I do not know the trade laws regarding rainforest timber, but Western importers should perform the due diligence to find out where the wood came from (like with blood diamonds), and boycott shadier sources. Builders/consumers should also scrutinize suppliers and call out/shame those who can't verify the sustainability/legitimacy of their sources. But likely illegal sellers offer lower prices, so foreign importers can pocket more profit if they pass it off as above-board. No one asks questions, and all we care about is the beautiful hardwood adorning our McMansions. Maybe gov'ts and trade orgs should demand that nations like Brazil curb illegal logging and make socioeconomic reforms, or face tariffs/sanctions (or even provide aid/counsel to help them reform). But the huge sums of money made by the powerful players on all sides of the trade is too important to let some trees and poor people get in the way.

Elephants are a protected species and ivory is illegal in many nations, but those laws are not well enforced in major consumption markets like China/Thailand. The US is an advanced nation, yet we are still a top importer too, so I guess we are not really in a position to criticize. Where is the education and stiff punishments for ivory smugglers/buyers to help dry up demand? Where is the global shaming/penalties on consumer markets and source countries? Int'l orgs and other bodies can influence African nations like Kenya to do more about elephant hunting. But even if they do, Asian buyers will just pay higher prices and enable poachers to defeat enhanced protections. We have to attack the demand, but then again no one wants to anger China because they are so economically important now. 

The saddest part is that ivory and rainforest hardwood are frivolous products without much intrinsic value. Some fish are being driven to extinction too, but at least you could make the argument that it's for food (even if fish are mostly being consumed by the rich who have more sustainable protein alternatives). There are cheaper and environmentally-friendly alternatives to wood and ivory too, but the problem is that some buyers desire those status products specifically because of their rare/exclusive/controversial status (more so for ivory). "Look how rich/powerful I am; I can put ivory all over my home with impunity." I know greed and selfishness will always be a part of the human condition, but some societies do a better job of teaching better values to its people. That is the best enforcement because you don't even need the legal system - people will "self police" because they don't value those illegal items to begin with, so it's a moot point. Sweden and Canada are rich nations, but I'm pretty sure ivory is not a problem there.

Brazil: where are their priorities?

http://sports.yahoo.com/photos/photo-finish-relive-the-weekend-in-sports-1372640894-slideshow/confederations-cup-photo--1751219419.html

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/20/world/americas/opinion-brazil-simoes

Two-and-a-half years have passed, and [President Rousseff] is still popular among the poorest, but the recent protests were led by a different bunch: The traditional middle class. On the streets, well-educated people, from central, urban areas, shouted that they had been sold a lie [about their lives getting better].  

Inflation is once again a major concern, violent crime is on the rise, cases of corruption fill the press, healthcare is in a precarious state, infrastructure projects have not materialized and street traffic is depressingly worse than ever.


While TV showed the inaugurations of costly, lavish football stadiums, people felt their lives were getting worse by the day. After all, the World Cup will cost the nation some $15 billion, and the promised legacy in infrastructure is still nowhere to be seen.

- CNN

So they won a soccer tournament tonight, big deal (it has no real consequence except raising their FIFA ranking from their current #22, just ahead of Mali). They did wipe out Spain, whose squad is believed to be one of the greatest in history according to some. But it's just sport - what about jobs, infrastructure, accountability, and gov. services?

The match took place in Rio as crowds tried to march on the stadium but were blocked by riot police. You've probably heard that a combined million Brazilians have been protesting their government recently - first sparked by something so mundane as a planned bus fare hike (like how the Turkey protests started over a park closure, or the Tunisia protests starting over the frustrations of one small businessman). But these "minor complaints" are part of a larger theme of 2nd world governments reaping the rewards of increasing int'l prominence, but not passing much of it down to the people.

Brazil is part of the sexy BRICS economies, and barely felt the recession. The Economist projects a healthy 3-4% real GDP growth rate through 2017. Yet public opinion of Brazil's president and legislature are much lower now vs. 2003. Wealth inequality in Brazil is one of the worst in the world (worse than the US), by Gini and other metrics. 5-6% inflation is a problem and the Real is expected to lose value against the $ each of the next 4 years. The current and former presidents come from a leftist labor party that capitalized on the support of the poor to win. But it is the middle class that is key for Brazil to become a true global power, and it is the middle class that is currently really pissed off (same with Turkey, and the US - though we are too cowardly to protest).

Occupy was a manifestation of this, but all around the world people are rising up because they are tired of putting up with gov'ts that claim things are going great and they are making your life better, yet people are hurting more and more. From Greece to China to Brazil, citizens are fed up with corrupt leaders who have their priorities all backwards, and are in office just to enrich themselves and serve the elite.

We know what the Olympics did to Greece's economy (and China violated all sorts of civil rights to make their Games happen), and now we have Brazil proud to host the 2014 World Cup and 2016 Summer Olympics. They're building fancy billion-dollar stadiums, yet basic services, rule of law, and such are terribly lacking (a successful int'l sporting event needs those things too!). There were concerns about the 2010 South Africa World Cup partly because that host was also in BRICS, and crime/poverty is endemic in parts of SA. FIFA even planned to use Brazil as a backup host if conditions in SA were too poor for the Cup. But now it seems Brazil is in worse shape. Of course a big int'l event is a way for the host to show off to the world that they have arrived. They sweep their national ills under the rug for a month while foreign revelers cheer, drink, and spend money. The Olympics didn't make China stronger (and didn't really boost their global prestige IMO), and Brazil shouldn't expect any better. Honor your commitments to your people first, then worry about stupid ballgames. Same goes for the US... but "bread and circuses" are effective distractions so the masses forget how their leaders are abusing them.

-------

You probably heard about the criticisms of the BRA gov't and FIFA leading up to the World Cup, but here is a humorous/pathetic summary too:

http://www.businessinsider.com/john-oliver-fifa-2014-6

Like the IOC and NCAA, FIFA is another corrupt, egotistical, short-sighted "nonprofit" sport mafia that is only interested in its finances (often at the expense of all other parties) - maybe to a more pathological level than some for-profit corporations. It's not about "the good of the game" or the players/fans. The sporting events themselves are entertaining and almost universally beloved, but the governing bodies are just immoral leeches capitalizing on our passion/addiction for the sport. Maybe because of that, at some point it has to be justified to boycott.