The post VIDEO: Young Female Councilor in Zambia Showing the Way appeared first on Green Forum Sweden.

I would like to believe that we do not have to open the debate why gender perspective should be taken into account when talking about climate change. If not for the all above mentioned, women account for about 50% of the population and we can’t ignore half of the target group.

However tireless efforts of the civil society, activists and politicians succeeded in bringing to light gender perspective in climate change discussions, education, and decision making. Hereby we will take a short look into climate financing and its gender perspectives.

First of all it has to be clear that making climate finance gender sensitive did not happen just like that. We should rather see it as big victory for outspoken climate feminists. Two basic perspectives on which this framework is based on are: true sustainability can not be achieved without gender perspective, and gender equality can not be achieved unless integrated at the very beginning of the process and in every aspect of the process.

Speaking about concrete funds[2], for example, already in 2011 Kyoto protocol Adaptation fund and Global Environmental Facility (GEF) had certain gender mainstreaming references. These were important steps but there was still a lot to be done. In 2014 for example only 18% of the projects under the GEF Climate mitigation work addressed gender.

The Green climate fund is the first multilateral fund to include gender equality in all layers of its work. For example gender equality as regards boards or staff is not only applicable to the fund’s own structure but to all stakeholders’ as well. All implementers of the project need to prove gender mainstreamed portfolio, proving that gender equality is not only a project requirement for one small part of their act, but organically embedded in the stakeholders’ principles of operation. This affects multinational banks, development funds, consulting agencies and other institutions that were of course not the biggest fans of #WomenOnBoards alike initiatives. Needless to say that when it came to final beneficiaries, projects needed to prove a sustainable contribution to gender equality and an improved position of women.

It is worth mentioning that climate funds’ gendered regulations work in favor for small to medium enterprises, as they are more likely to be owned by women or at least have better gender balance records then big multinational consortiums. Thus we see that gender regulations boost diversification of involved actors as well as make climate action more rooted to the local level.

Climate funds are contributing to gender equality a great deal. Though we need to safeguard achieved regulations and make them mandatory for other funds as well. Civil society, women organizations, etc. must be involved in monitoring and evaluation processes and ensure that work done through climate funds complement and amplify our struggles for women rights in other fields as well.

/Vesna Jusup

Works with member relations at the European Green Party secretariat 

Former project leader at Cooperation and Development Network of Eastern Europe

[1] *This text was inspired and fueled by Liane Schalatek, Associate director at Heinrich Boell Foundation North America office, who tirelessly pushes for gender issues to be in the agenda of Climate discussions and close to the heart of the Climate financing

[2] Schalatek, Nakhooda: Gender and Climate Finance, Overseas development institute, 2016  https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9321.pdf

The blog was originally published on Green Forum website on 5 December, 2016

The post CLIMATE FINANCING AS GENDER EQUALITY CATALYST appeared first on Green Forum Sweden.

Although some of the first Green parties in Europe date back to the ’70s, Green ideology in its wide understanding only began to take roots in Eastern Europe much later. Even though the term “Green” came to be used in a political sense, the “old” Green parties in reality did not stand for these values. Therefore the second generation of greens, apart from the fight with the governments and imposed traditional values, have been fighting to reclaim the term in their countries and associate it with its core values – environmental consciousness, democracy, social justice, gender equality, non-violence and  solidarity.

However, the Green agenda has been taken up by youth initiatives throughout Eastern Europe – from Georgia to Croatia, from Albania to Belarus. Some of them are growing from scratch, while some are originating from the mother parties. As a regionally established network – CDN has become (with the support of Green Forum and FYEG) the reference point for Green politics in Eastern Europe. It is supporting the structural growth of new generations of Greens, while also aiming to bridge the gap between the regional division of East and West within the Green family.

It is not a surprise that the doors to national stakeholders in Eastern Europe open much easier for an international green organisation than for the local young greens. What this means in practice is that young greens trigger an action in their countries and the Network provides support for them, by establishing connections with green politicians, MEPs, local politicians and journalists from other (Eastern) European countries, therefore working on gaining the support of the entirety of Europe for the issue. A wide range of issues are crucial for these young activists and politicians, starting from climate change and de-growth to freedom of speech and propaganda, from gender equality and online security to sustainable cities and commons. The exchange and cooperation in these fields are crucial for showing to the public, the members and other political actors, that Green politics are far more than just environmental consciousness, by putting emphasis on solidarity and support.

/Katarina Pavlovic

Project coordinator of Cooperation and Development Network of Eastern Europe

For more info about CDN please visit CDN website

*The blog was originally published on Green Forum website on October 20, 2016

The post PARTNERSHIPS FOR A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT appeared first on Green Forum Sweden.

The Swedish newspaper, Götebors Posten, published an important debate written by a few researchers from Gothenburg University, Professor Fredrik Söderbaum et al, on June 29th 2016.  In this debate they emphasized one of the major issues on aid policy within the framework of development policies:

“Policy framework fails to adequately take into account the poor people’s ability and power to themselves create the development they want for themselves, their families and their countries. Research on the driving forces behind development emphasizes people and their organizations and institutions – from trade unions to religious organizations and cooperatives to local history societies and diaspora groups – are the most important development resource and thus the main driving force for social change.”

This important issue has already been discussed internationally by many scholars during the last decades and are relevant to Sweden’s aid policy as well as other countries. Although the successful actions for change on this major issue have not yet been taken, there is further need to improve the next step of critical approach to the aid policy. Further critical approach on aid policy is needed to provide a profound and comprehensive knowledge on the power relations of the recipient countries. For instance one of the key issues regarding power relations in recipient countries are: whose voices are heard and whose voices are unheard in shaping in recipient countries? What are the diverse narratives or stories among the people?

The fact that there are greater socio-economic gaps and social injustice within the developing’s world compare to the rich world, should be taken into considerations by donors countries. Due to the great gap in socio-economic, social status and power relations in recipient countries, the voices being heard are often the strongest voices.

Thus, the constant question that should be asked in analysis framework and action planning should assume: whether or not the donors reach out to the civil society’s real representative? Have the donors reached all the storytellers and strengthen all the voices?  How could the donors reach the divers storytellers in order to include different part of the civil society in problem analysis, needs assessment and action plan?

MANIJEH MEHDIYAR

*The blog was originally published on Green Forum website on July 19, 2016

The post THE ROLE OF STORYTELLERS IN DEVELOPMENT POLICY appeared first on Green Forum Sweden.

Throughout history there have been several divestment campaigns that contributed to changes in sectors they had targeted. For ex. campaigns against military actions in Darfur, Tobacco industry, etc.  Perhaps the most famous example was the Divestment campaign as regards the Apartheid system in South Africa.

Concerning Divestment from fossil fuels, the argumentation is built around 3 arguments:

1. Moral argument – To illustrate it, the best way would be to quote Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org: “If it’s wrong to wreck the climate then it’s wrong to profit from that wreckage”. To reach the Paris climate goals, up to 80 percent of fossil fuel reserves have to remain in the ground.
2. Democratic argument – is applicable to investment funds over which citizens should have ownership. Pensions funds, Universities, Local authorities and city/municipal governments, etc. These investments must be transparent and citizens must have a say in the way money is used. If we elect local governments on bases of their political programme we must ensure that their investments with public money are also following the same political line. Having said that, as so many elected politicians on different levels pledge their support and will to combat climate change, one could expect huge amounts of public funds to be divested from fossil fuel industries any time soon.
3. Financial argument – If a vast majority of fossil fuel reserves will not be used due to strict climate policies, fossil fuel companies (and their shares) will lose value dramatically. Therefore, foresighted investors are already backing out of fossil fuel investments, not (only) for moral reasons, but because of the financial risk these investments are bearing.

Divestment is not only about stopping or slowing down damaging processes. The potential of divestment lies in the fact that financial means remain at our disposal to invest them in sustainable activities/industries. Investing in a development of renewable energy will never be easier than in times when we divest public and private money from fossil fuel industries.

The real power of divestment is in the fact that it delegitimizes the fossil fuel industry and that it expands a notion of political participation to finances and raise the demand for full transparency and accountability of the ones we elect to govern.

At the end, it is important to mention the campaign Divestment from Fossil fuels. It is clear that the world energy supply cannot continue on its fossil basis and that complexity of climate change needs to be tackled through different means. One thing we can do is to demand, among others, our municipalities, our banks, our universities, our pension fund, our churches, and our insurances to divest from fossil fuels. Divest now!

/Vesna Jusup 

Works with member relations at the European Green Party secretariat 

Former project leader at Cooperation and Development Network of Eastern Europe 

http://fpif.org/divestment_ending_the_genocide_in_darfur/

https://www.nsra-adnf.ca/cms/file/files/NSRA%20MLT%20Divestment%20Fact%20Sheet%20Dec14%20final2.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinvestment_from_South_Africa

https://europeangreens.eu/fossilfree2016

The blog was originally published on Green Forum website on 15 June, 2016

The post DIVEST NOW! appeared first on Green Forum Sweden.

We have seen global demands over the past years for a paradigm shift to more sustainable patterns of development that will ensure that the economic progress that countries would continue to make in the coming years will no longer compromise unduly environmental sustainability and would adhere to the principles of equity, the 2012 Rio+20 Summit’s outcome document, “The Future We Want”, recognised “green economy” as an important avenue for sustainable and inclusive development as well as accelerated poverty eradication by promoting improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental deterioration and ecological risks.

Recent publications by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) reconfirm the imperative for accelerated transformation to a green economy for achieving the various global agenda, notably the Sustainable Development Goals. Within the context of these debates, active discussions are ongoing on “inclusive green economy”, which highlights elements of a socio-ecological and economy-wide transformation firmly underpinned by principles of sustainability and energy saving technologies and processes.

They, thus, call for radical changes in production and consumption patterns, strong institutional and capacity building, wide spread introduction of energy saving technologies and accompanying economic, fiscal policy reforms and legislative changes that are specifically geared towards safeguarding the above principles of sustainability, environmental protection and social equity. We need to promote greener development, transformation processes and climate resilience.

The rationale for all this is derived from the increasingly apparent adverse effects of climate change on human lives, livelihoods, social capital and physical infrastructure as well as over reliance on non-renewable fossil fuels, such as petroleum and coal.

There is by now incontrovertible scientific evidence that the effects of climate change being progressively experienced today in all parts of the world are caused by rising and volatile temperatures from an accumulation of Green House Gases, dominated by carbon dioxide, in the atmosphere. Several scientific studies indicate that this process of releasing Green House Gases intensified with effect from the industrial revolution.

The argument is thus made that the releasing of Green House Gases into the atmosphere has principally been the responsibility of the advanced industrialized countries as well as the newly industrialized ones. This notwithstanding, there is no doubt that the responsibility for effectively responding to the increasingly devastating effects of climate change lies with all the nations around the world.

This responsibility should be discharged through reduction of carbon footprints, adaptation and mitigation of risks of damage to crops, homes and other property, infrastructure, loss of livestock, wildlife and other biodiversity and above all, to human lives. This means systematically incorporating climate change considerations into all development and transformation strategies. It is also crucial that changes in our mind-sets, behaviors and cultural practices in consumption patterns and economic activities are urgently effected.

In this regard, we must endeavour to use resources efficiently in consumption and production and ensure that our production processes and other economic and lifestyle activities are low-carbon generating, meaning the release of the minimum possible greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

/ Frank Habineza

Honorary Doctorate in Democracy and Human Rights, Bethel collage, USA 

President, Democratic Green Party of Rwanda

President African Greens Federation

*The blog was originally published on Green Forum website on May 24, 2016

The post CLIMATE CHANGE RESILIENCE STRATEGIES A TOOL TOWARDS ACHIEVING SDGS appeared first on Green Forum Sweden.

Yet, economic growth and its attached policies are still considered the panacea to have development and sustainable societies. Einstein once said that the way of thinking that got you into a mess is not the kind that will get you out of it. So, why is the question what we want from a society, and if the current structures are allowing us to do so, rarely asked?

Economist Kate Raworth decided to ask this question by saying: “what if economics started with human wellbeing rather than money?” and thus developing a new type of system: doughnut economics! Rather than emphasising the flow of money, Raworth’s theory places our social foundations such as social equity, energy, health and food (exhaustive list in the picture below) at the centre. Moreover, she also added our planetary boundaries in another layer, based on Johan Rockström and his colleagues’ work, creating the outline of just a doughnut. Planetary boundaries refer to things such as ozone depletion, climate change and ocean acidification, all with limits we need to stay within if we are to avoid disastrous and irreversible environmental change.

The challenge is to ensure our social foundation while keeping within the planetary boundaries and how we do this practically. However, today, as we know through the sustainable development goals, none of the social foundations have reached their boundary i.e. where everyone has access to clean water, education etc., while three of the planetary boundaries have been overrun. As Raworth argues, in order to meet human rights and ensure the wellbeing of all people within the planetary boundaries we need to get into the doughnut, a safe space for humanity where the earth and its systems are supported. So, who is up for a doughnut?

/Anna Tranberg  

Works with research and innovation at the Swedish governmental agency for innovation systems

Federation of Young European Greens COP21 delegate

To read more check out: Coe, N M., Kelly, P F., and Yeung H W., (2007) Economic geography. A contemporary Introduction. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.

*The blog was originally published on Green Forum website on May 24, 2016

The post WHAT TO DO(UGHNUT) ABOUT THE ECONOMY? appeared first on Green Forum Sweden.

With the rise of awareness and care for the environment, it has become popular for companies and sometimes even entire countries to, just like this company is painting its walls into bright colors, paint their image into something reminiscent of green and sustainability. Greenwashing – a term which has become commonly used in the situations where eco-friendly aspects of a product, politics or companies’ goal are pointed out through marketing manipulations. In practice it looks like this: the companies spend far more resources on appearing green than actually making their business sustainable.

¨Green is the new red¨ is a saying gaining popularity. This title has been well accepted by the big companies, so the focus on social responsibility is being increasingly shift towards nature, all with the aim of increasing profit. The examples of greenwashing can be seen everywhere, starting from the attempts to make the users see a product as eco-friendly by changing the visual identity of that product. Forest and flowery designs can so often be found on the packages of very harmful chemical products. McDonalds had a Europe campaign in 2009 when they changed the logo from yellow-red to yellow-green, without changing anything in their politics and the way the company works. In Serbia there are also ˝green¨ petrol stations which have no proof of sustainability nor any other sign of being different from the remaining stations apart from that ¨green¨ label which merely serves to decoy the users.

As usual, Coca Cola set high standards when it comes to ¨green¨ marketing. It recently became possible in some countries to buy Coke in green package, the only actual difference being a little less sugar and calories. Bottles made of eco materials are also a part of eco campaign, but as it turns out, the company has no proof to support their claim that the bottles don’t affect the environment and reduce carbon footprint.  Another seemingly useful campaign conducted by Coca Cola and some ecological organisations was the restoration of wetlands and flooded areas along Danube as well as preservation of freshwater resources. Maybe this campaign would seem appealing if we didn’t know the ways this type of production excessively exploits drinking water springs which were until yesterday public good and property of all citizens. A more striking example comes from India, where fizzy beverages factories excessively used drinking water sources, thus leading the local residents to the brink of starvation since there is  insufficient water to irrigate the crops. And then some other ¨experts¨ recommended to the same residents to solve their problem by acquiring Monsanto GMO seeds which demands less water.

By seeing what lies behind brightly painted walls and by merely busting greenwashing myths, we can make the first step towards a more sustainable society which is in accordance with the nature.

/Predrag Momcilovic

Project manager at Serbian Green Youth, research associate at Belgrade University, Serbia

The blog was originally published on Green Forum website on 23 May, 2016

The post GREENWASHING – PAINT IT GREEN appeared first on Green Forum Sweden.

Let me give you some examples from my home town, Gothenburg, in western Sweden. Encompassing Scandinavia’s biggest port and Sweden’s major automotive industry, the city is a large transportation hub with a cluster of companies and researchers within logistics and transport. This cluster carries a huge potential for urgently needed innovations, to meet demands set by the politicians as well to create business opportunities for companies of the next generation.

The city has taken a decision to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from goods transport with at least 80 per cent by 2030 compared with 2010 and more than double public transport by 2035. The first ever bus line in Sweden run by electricity powered buses started here in April 2014. The test has been a success which today draws attention from around the world. A tunnel for commuter trains under the city shall make commuters choose public transport instead of private cars from 2026 onwards.

Waste heat from refineries and other industrial processes are keeping people’s homes warm, via district heating. New building techniques makes renovated houses and new-builds more energy efficient. Energy consumption in homes are to be reduced by 30 percent by 2020 compared to 1995.

But more can be done and needs to be done. The use of waste heat could be extended even more, if the district heating grids in Gothenburg and surrounding municipalities were better connected. Environmental criteria can be imposed more rigorously than today in public tendering. Here we politicians have an important role to play.

These are all examples of technical solutions that are absolutely vital if we are to live within the nature’s borders. But they are not enough. If we shall succeed with the necessary transformation of our societies, we also need a change in people’s mind set. And I believe this could be underway.

For some months a six hours working day has been tested at a retirement home in Gothenburg. The results are encouraging; sick leave rate is down, service quality up. Even so, conservative and liberal politicians want to stop the project. It’s too costly, they say. I believe there is another reason to it as well; that a shorter working day in their eyes sends the wrong signals to the Swedish work force in general. In my view though it would be a good thing if people spent more time with friends and family instead of working as much as possible in order to earn as much as possible so that they can consume as much as possible.

Another example that might indicate a broader change in mind set is that the sharing economy is on the rise. The car sharing organisation that I’m a member of has today 1 100 cars in fifty different cities in Sweden. And this is just one of eight similar organisations situated in Gothenburg. A neighbouring family of ours has spent vacations in Australia, New York, London, France… using home exchange. The transition movement offers an alternative perspective on the world we live in and how we could organise societies in order to handle the ecological, energy and economic crises that we, according to them, are facing.

We in the global North has a moral obligation to lead the way for a sustainable future. This should not be seen as a sacrifice: a sustainable world also brings with it life patterns that are more in line with what happiness research tells us we want the most; more time with our loved ones, more possibilities to self-fulfilment.

We are on the right path. And the most encouraging changes are taking place locally. Gothenburg is part of different networks were cities share experiences and develop joint projects in order to push ahead the transformation needed.

These local initiatives of course go hand in hand with national policies and international agreements. They seldom make headlines in media, but I believe that in the long run these local developments will prove the most important.

/Lars-Olof Karlsson

Chairperson Green Forum

*The blog was originally published on Green Forum website on May 22, 2016

The post GLOBAL CHALLENGES – LOCAL SOLUTIONS appeared first on Green Forum Sweden.