Daewoo Corn

I would like to raise another point that may be worth considering (putting all
the environmental problems that may result from this deal aside for awhile):

I might have been misinformed but from what I understand, the corn planted in
these lands are not going to be destined for local consumption alone. If this
is true, Madagascar may benefit from this deal in the short term (e.g. job
creation, reduced independence from the imported corn) since we are not using
the land right now (I assume this is the case and that we are not taking fertile
land away from people or cut forests to grow these corns and palm trees). The
question is, what will happen when we will have the technology in the future and
will need the land to grow our own food to meet our demands?

By that time, these lands will be so used up and will not be fertile anymore.
We also need to be aware that this is how some countries try to use
irreplaceable resources from other countries to help sustain the consumption
need of their large populations. These countries are often so populated that
they do not have enough land and water anymore to grow food and feed their
people. That is why they are investing in finding these resources elsewhere.

We have two main issues at hand: the need to curtail this crushing poverty and
the need to leave something behind for the next generations. In my opinion, this
deal is not necessarily bad or good. We just need to make sure that it is
carefully studied, both the short term and long terms costs and benefits, and
not only from an economic standpoint. We need to internalize potential costs of
restoring the ecosystems that may be affected by this project.

Both the efforts of those who try to do something to deal with our crushing
poverty and those of who are concerned about the long term environmental and
economic impacts of these projects are commendable. I do not think we can
simplify this into a wrong and right issue. To just close our eyes and let
people die in poverty would be cruel. But also, to bargain the life of the next
generations just for the sake of short term economic benefits would be selfish.


But this does not have to be a dichotomy. We just need a sense of balance
between both. The key is: where that balance should be? This is a difficult
question but one way to get there is to get everyone involved and be open to all
ideas. Then, collectively decide what that balance should represent. Only in
this way, we can make sure that nothing is overlooked and that we know exactly
what we get into when we make that decision...whatever that is.

Anyway, just sharing thoughts on this issue,

Eric

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

IMF Executive Board Discusses the First Assessment of Eligible Countries under the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative

On December 21, 2005 the Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) established the list of countries that qualify for debt relief from the Fund under the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI). Debt relief delivery, which could start as soon as January 3, 2005, is now conditional on getting the consents of all the contributors to the Subsidy Account of the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) Trust, whose contributions help finance the Initiative. The MDRI will deliver debt relief from the Fund to qualifying members countries with an annual per capita income at or below US$380, and to countries above the threshold that have reached the completion point under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative. The implementation of the MDRI will reduce the external debt burden of a number of the world's poorest countries and will provide additional resources to help them reach the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Background The Executive Board appro...
Read more

Oil’s chaotic collapse deepens; stocks drop worldwide

Image
NEW YORK (AP) — Oil prices crumpled even further Tuesday, and U.S. stocks sank to their worst loss in weeks as worries swept markets worldwide about the economic carnage caused by the coronavirus pandemic. The market’s spotlight was again on oil, where prices have plummeted because very few people are flying or driving, and factories have shut amid widespread stay-at-home orders. Global demand is set to drop to levels last seen in the mid 1990s. At the same time, oil producers can’t slow their production fast enough, and all the extra crude means storage tanks are quickly running out of room. The cost for a barrel of U.S. oil to be delivered in June plunged 43% to $11.57. That’s the part of the market that oil traders are focused on and trading most actively. For oil to be delivered next month, which is when storage tanks could top out, the cost of a barrel stood at $10.01. A day earlier, it fell below zero for the first time, meaning traders paid others to take oil off their hand...
Read more

Mapping Extreme Poverty Around the World A new report from the

Image
A new report from the  World Bank  just landed, finding that a record low of 10% of humanity now live in extreme poverty, down from 11% in 2013. But poverty rates aren’t anywhere close to equal between continents or even countries, as our new series of maps clearly demonstrates. The World Bank provides an in-depth explanation for its methodology, which you can find in Appendix A of the full report  here . We focused on the percentage of people in each country living below what the World Bank defines as extreme poverty, or $1.90/day. We’ll let the researchers defend this definition on their own, but there is one caveat to keep in mind. It can be extraordinarily difficult to collect reliable data from so many countries on a regular basis, and in fact we used the latest year in which numbers were available whenever possible. For example, in some of these maps we compare 2011 figures against 2015. In short, our maps provide the clearest possible apples-to-apples compa...
Read more