EcoNexus is a not-for-profit public interest research organisation analysing developments in science and technology and their impacts on environment and society. Read more

Highlighted

December 2011 - Commentary - Climate change & Agriculture
Helena Paul

An agriculture work programme may sound attractive to those who are concerned about issues like:

  • Agriculture emissions increase climate change – and agriculture is profoundly affected by climate change
  • Agriculture has a severe impact on forests
  • Soils can store a great deal of carbon - but does that mean there should be a soil carbon market?

Others cite the need to support peasants, “smallholder farmers”, local production and food sovereignty. They want a programme of work on agriculture on condition that such issues are prioritised and that the programme addresses adaptation equally with mitigation.
Several Parties and international institutions advocate an agriculture work programme with the aim of using agriculture and soil carbon to offset emissions. The aim is to link agriculture and REDD+ under the title of climate-smart agriculture and apply the “integrated landscape approach”. This could lead to every aspect of agriculture, indeed the whole landscape, being measured in terms of carbon, even though there are serious scientific questions about the validity, let alone the possibility, of this approach.

September 2011
Helena Paul

As Rio+20 approaches, we are publishing two new articles on corporations:

Calling the corporations to account
is a short history of why corporate power was not tackled at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, even though many people went to Rio with the purpose of limiting it. It is written to stimulate efforts to make Rio+20 the place where we finally begin the international process to control corporate power.

Corporations are not human, so why should they have human rights?
explains how corporations came to have human rights, and asks whether this is desirable, and what we might do about it.

Who’s in Charge?
Through these articles, we also want to highlight a previous piece of work. This is a short history of the development of the modern corporation and corporate personhood in the UK, written by Daniel Bennett at the request of Helena Paul, for the Programme on Corporations, Law and Democracy.

March 2011 - Article - (Green) Economy
Helena Paul

Forest Cover, No. 37, p. 5-6

At the recent preparatory conference for Rio+20 in New York (7-8th March) it became clear that the “green economy” concept is complicating an already difficult process. Definitions of sustainable development have been argued over for years; now we are invited instead to see everything in terms of a “green economy”. UNEP, which produced its massive economics-dominated report shortly before the prepcom/conference, defines the “green economy” as one that results in improved human wellbeing and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities. Thus the biodiversity and ecosystem resilience on which we all depend are reduced to “risks” and “scarcities”. Even though it is clear that the “green economy” means very different things to different interests, many parties simply parroted the phrase over and over; Bolivia was one of the few that commented critically, noting that there is not a shared vision of what the "green economy" might be.

May 2011 - Commentary - Biochar

Commentary

Helena Paul

Biochar is biomass burned in the near absence of oxygen and it is basically identical to charcoal, but used for different purposes. It is being widely promoted by various interests as a soil amendment and to sequester carbon, often with little detailed argument or evidence in support of the claims made.
The book "Biochar for Environmental Management" provides of a large collection of articles about biochar by a total of some 50 researchers and specialists from a wide range of universities, government departments and companies. It demonstrates clearly that there are major gaps in knowledge. However, at the same time, some writers speak of biochar as a means to address climate change and propose it for carbon markets, in spite of these knowledge gaps.

December 2009 - Report - Biochar, Climate change & Agriculture, GE soya, Lifestock, Marginal land, Synthetic biology
by Helena Paul, Almuth Ernsting, Stella Semino, Susanne Gura & Antje Lorch EcoNexus, Biofuelwatch, Grupo de Reflexion Rural, NOAH - Friends of the Earth Denmark, and The Development Fund Norway

Report published for the Conference of the Parties, COP15, of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Copenhagen, December 2009.

Few would deny that agriculture is especially severely affected by climate change and that the right practices contribute to mitigate it, yet expectations of the new climate agreement diverge sharply, as well as notions on what are good and what are bad agricultural practices and whether soil carbon sequestration should be part of carbon trading.

September 2010 - Scientific opinion - GE mosquitoes

Scientific opinion to the Department of Biosafety, Ministery of Natural Resources and Environment of Malaysia

Ricarda A. Steinbrecher

In August 2010, the Malaysian Ministry for Natural Resource and Environment announced plans to release the GM mosquito Aedes aegypti OX513A (NRE(S)609-2/1/3) and invited scientific opinions. EcoNexus submitted the following Scientific Opinion.

May 2008 - Report - GE trees, Risk assessment

An overview of risk assessment and risk management issues

by Ricarda A. Steinbrecher and Antje Lorch

Published by the Federation of German Scientists. Presented at CBD COP9 negotiations on GE trees

Trees differ in a number of important characteristics from field crops, and these characteristics are also relevant for any risk assessment of genetically engineered (GE) trees. A review of the scientific literature shows that due to the complexity of trees as organisms with large habitats and numerous interactions, currently no meaningful and sufficient risk assessment of GE trees is possible, and that especially a trait-specific risk assessment is not appropriate. Both scientific literature and in-field experience show that contamination by and dispersal of GE trees will take place. Transgenic sterility is not an option to avoid the potential impacts posed by GE trees and their spread. Regulation of trees on a national level will not be sufficient because due to the large-scale dispersion of reproductive plant material, GE trees are likely to cross national borders. All this makes GE trees a compelling case for the application of the precautionary principle.