Search

When the subject of deforestation comes up, four large drivers often come to mind: beef, palm oil, soy and timber. But the global demand for chocolate is also causing its share of deforestation, especially in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana, which by most accounts are the world's two largest producers of cocoa beans.

Côte d’Ivoire has lost almost half of its original forest cover; estimates suggest Ghana’s tropical forest areas are now only a quarter of their original size. With 3 million tons of cocoa and chocolate products made annually, this $100 billion industry is at risk of long-term decline if cocoa farmers cannot become more careful stewards of the land, say WWF and other NGOs.

The Prince of Wales has taken a keen interest in the cocoa sector and its impact on forests across the globe.

Last week, Prince Charles hosted a meeting that included representatives of the world’s largest chocolate manufacturers, including Mars, Nestlé, Mondelēz and Hershey. Delegations from Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana, the countries that will be the focus of this initiative, also attended.

The outcome of the meeting in London is a statement of intent that aims to bring corporate, government and civil society together in order to halt deforestation and forest degradation brought on by the chocolate industry.

Other companies pledging to work on this effort include producers and suppliers Blommer, Cargill, Olam, and Touton; chocolatiers Barry Callebaut and Ferrero have also given their support.

A more detail framework will be announced later this year at the COP23 climate talks scheduled to occur in Bonn, Germany.

Many of these companies, which also produce palm oil or use the ingredient in their products, have already established deforestation policies in some form. They weren't left with much choice, as NGOs have been successful in educating consumers about the impact the global food industry’s supply chain has on both human rights and the planet.

Mars, for example, says it has taken several steps to mitigate deforestation. The company also insists it has embarked on a program to work with cocoa farmers to boost yields while teaching them more sustainable farming practices. For the most part, WWF has been supportive of Mars’ efforts, especially when it comes to palm oil, the ingredient that helps give many chocolate products their smooth and silky consistency.

Mondelēz, which spun off from Kraft Foods in 2012, also discloses its own deforestation policy. The company launched a program in late 2015 to use market-based approaches to stop deforestation in Côte d’Ivoire, and one of the initiative’s goals was to work with 26,000 small-scale cocoa farmers in the country. The company, which owns brands such as Cadbury, Milka and Toblerone, also received high marks from WWF for its anti-deforestation work elsewhere within its supply chain.

Many of these companies had fractious relationships with environmental organizations in the past over the chocolate industry’s ties to deforestation and human rights violations. Earlier this decade, for example, Greenpeace savaged Nestlé for what it said were the links between popular chocolate bar brands like Kit Kat and environmental destruction.

Nestlé has since launched a deforestation policy, and several years later Greenpeace praised the company (as well as Ferrero) for making significant progress within its supply chain. But those corporate commitments are mostly focused on palm oil. Cocoa has largely stayed under the radar, as outrage over palm oil’s impact in Indonesia and Malaysia scored more news headlines and more attention.

Now these companies have put cocoa front and center.

The first challenge this group will face, once it establishes a framework, is communicating the broad goals -- which include sustainable farming practices, women’s empowerment and land restoration. Unlike palm oil, which is mostly grown on large plantations managed by huge companies, cocoa farming involves millions of small farmers, many of whom toil for about $1 a day.

These companies will have to rely on the governments of Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana for these programs to scale; and neither of these countries rank particularly high on the anti-corruption front.

The challenges are huge, but the chocolate industry really had no other option if it is going to survive in the long run.

Image credit: Nestlé/Flickr

Some energy analysts are optimistic that renewables will continue to surge under the Donald Trump administration, with or without help from the Clean Power Plan. Part of that cheerful outlook is due to huge renewable energy buys already in the pipeline.

These projects will be difficult if not impossible to reverse. A case in point is the latest news from the U.S. Department of the Interior, which just announced a $9 million winning bid in auction for more than 122,000 acres of offshore wind energy development in the waters of North Carolina, at Kitty Hawk.

More American offshore wind energy

The U.S. has been a bit slow to join the global offshore wind market. But the long, relatively shallow Atlantic coastline is a tantalizing prize for renewable energy stakeholders.

According to one study, there is enough wind potential off the Atlantic coast to power every city on the eastern seaboard.

The industry made a significant step toward development in 2010, when the Barack Obama administration organized a lease program for Atlantic offshore wind energy under the Interior Department's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM).

Several Republican governors of states on the eastern seaboard took steps to block offshore wind development, which slowed things down. But Rhode Island finally broke the logjam. Last fall, the tiny state flipped the switch on America's very first offshore wind farm.

Next up could be New York state, where Norway's Statoil recently won the rights to develop an 80,000-acre site for offshore wind.

BOEM held an auction for two wind areas off the New Jersey shore in 2015. But without a strong advocate in state leadership, those projects may stall out.

So far, New Jerseys's Board of Public Utilities has failed to take critical rule-making steps to prepare for the sale of the electricity generated by the proposed wind farm. Another offshore wind project in the state is also near collapse, which some locals attribute to policies under Gov. Chris Christie, despite support from the Obama administration.

In a rather tragic twist, the New York wind area is located within sight of the New Jersey shore. Once the New York wind farm is up and running, New Jersey residents will get a nice view of those turbines spinning on the horizon.

North Carolina wind on the rise

North Carolina has emerged as a clean power leader among southeastern states, partly because it is the only state in that region to establish renewable energy requirements.

Those rules took effect in 2007. They continued to propel renewable energy development in the state even after Republican Gov. Pat McCrory won the election in 2012, though offshore wind development spun its wheels. The prospects for offshore wind look better now that the state is under new leadership.

In the latest news, BOEM capped a five-year planning effort by announcing that the lease for North Carolina's Kitty Hawk wind area was provisionally granted to the company Avangrid Renewables.

The potential generating capacity of the wind area is an impressive 1,486 megawatts, according to estimates from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, which can power around 500,000 homes. Avangrid will determine the actual size of the wind farm.

Zinke hearts renewables

In a press release announcing the results of the North Carolina auction, U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke appeared to make a clear break with Trump administration energy policy. He provided a ringing endorsement of renewables:

"The success of this lease sale reflects the continued interest of coastal communities to develop their offshore energy resources," Secretary Zinke said. "Renewable energy, like offshore wind, is one tool in the all of the above energy toolbox that will help power America with domestic energy, securing energy independence, and bolstering the economy."

And, here's the closing line:

"This is a big win for collaborative efforts with state, local, and private sector partners."

Though Zinke left the federal government out of his quote, the body of the press release makes it clear that the process was steered by his agency:

"BOEM has been working with the North Carolina Renewable Energy Task Force since 2010 to identify an area of sufficient size for offshore wind development, while avoiding ecologically sensitive areas and multiple use conflicts."

Avangrid Renewables also emphasized the role of the federal government in offshore wind development. Here's a snippet from the official statement from company CEO James P. Torgerson:

"We salute the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the Department of the Interior for the professional manner in which they went about the bidding process, reflected by the initial large number of parties that pre-qualified to bid."

Regardless of Zinke's praise and the support of a major global company (Avangrid is under the Ibderola Group umbrella), the Trump administration could throw up some roadblocks.

There is still some paperwork to be done before the lease is official, including an analysis by the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission.

If all goes according to the timetable, Avangrid has a window of 4.5 years to submit a construction plan for approval by BOEM.

Image (cropped): via the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.

By Amy Augustine

As we confront a new political climate that is inspiring both uncertainty and rising citizen action, I am more convinced than ever that business must play a critical role in achieving a sustainable, equitable and clean-energy future. Bold leadership, as well as individual and collective action from influential companies and investors, is critical to ensure continued progress in achieving the ambitions of the historic Paris Climate Agreement and the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals.

Fortunately, companies we engage with here at Ceres continue to demonstrate that sustainability is not just good for the bottom line; it is the bottom line. Despite backward steps in Washington, there is unprecedented clarity in the business community – especially from the Fortune 100s – that building a healthy, low-carbon economy is irresistible and irreversible. Examples of this are popping up everywhere, although still not at the pace and scale we need.

These seven key corporate trends are ready for primetime and will be critically important in advancing our sustainability goals, no matter the political winds in Washington.

1. Corporate support for clean-energy policy is accelerating

Corporate energy buyers want renewable energy – and not just to help them meet their own greenhouse gas reduction goals. Renewable energy prices are increasingly cost-competitive in many parts of the country, and they remove the long-term risks associated with fossil fuel energy price volatility.

More than 900 companies and investors are calling on President Trump and Congress to keep the U.S. in the Paris Climate Agreement and to support low-carbon policies in the U.S. And nearly 100 global companies have signed on to to the RE100 initiative, a commitment to source all of their energy from renewables.

Lacking a national carbon mitigation strategy, states and cities will continue to be the platforms on which we’ll see meaningful clean-energy progress. In Michigan, Ohio and Virginia, among other states, companies are helping to shape policies that strengthen and increase access to renewable energy, leading to more clean-energy investment and jobs in those states.

Stay tuned for our upcoming Power Forward report this spring documenting these trends among Fortune 500 companies.

2. More investors expect companies to disclose climate-related risks and opportunities

The Task Force on Climate-Related Disclosures (TCFD) – whose leadership includes Ceres member companies such as Bloomberg LP and JPMorgan Chase – recently published a specific guidance on how companies should evaluate and disclose climate risks in financial filings.

Investors and global stock exchanges are taking notice, especially in regard to how carbon-intensive companies are analyzing business impacts under scenarios where carbon pollution is reduced at levels that would limit global warming to 2-degrees Celsius or less – the goal of the Paris Climate Agreement.

More than ever, investors are aiming these questions at energy-intensive companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron, which are already struggling financially as global oil demand is waning.

3. Companies are advancing human rights reporting and performance

Companies are facing unprecedented scrutiny on their human rights performance and reporting. In 2015, the nonprofit group Shift that helps organizations to implement the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), developed the UNGP reporting framework, which companies such as Ericsson, Nestle, and Unilever are already utilizing to strengthen human rights reporting and performance.

Ceres is now collaborating with Shift to advance corporate adoption and implementation of the framework to drive improved human rights performance across direct operations and global supply chains.

4. Water risks are rising on the investor agenda

Water crises such as prolonged droughts and extreme precipitation events – been in California, lately? – were again among the top five global impact risks in an annual report from the World Economic Forum.

Increasingly, companies operating in water-stressed regions are proactively taking action to conserve and protect water sources. General Mills, Gap and PepsiCo, are among a growing cadre of companies engaging with California policymakers on the urgency for stronger water management policies in this water-starved state.

5. Competence on sustainability is becoming a measure of board effectiveness

Corporate boards have a key authority and responsibility to boost corporate attention on long-term sustainability risks like climate change. Large investors are increasingly focused on the role board members can play on sustainability. U.S. pension funds CalPERS and CalSTRS, for example, both recently updated their governance principles to explicitly request that company boards have stronger experience and expertise on climate risk management.

In the coming months, investors and other stakeholders will be looking to engage with key governance experts within companies on this topic, including corporate secretaries and general counsel.

6. SDGs will be a bigger driver of strategy and action

In 2015, more than 190 world leaders committed to 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aimed at ending extreme poverty, eliminating longstanding inequalities and fighting climate change.

Worldwide momentum behind these internationally supported goals continues to gain strength, and at the upcoming Ceres Conference we will hear from Novozymes, BASF and Intel about how they are aligning their commitments and business strategies with this global vision.

7. Sustainable sourcing is becoming the new norm

Access to reliable, affordable supplies of key inputs is threatened by climate change, water scarcity risks, and the use of unethical practices like deforestation and forced labor. Agricultural supply chains are feeling some of the biggest pressures, leading to stronger action by investors and companies themselves to push for strategies to assess and manage these risks.

This spring, Ceres will release an interactive tool called Engage the Chain to help investors and companies better understand wide-ranging agricultural commodity risks.

No doubt, company actions on all of these fronts will continue to evolve – and, hopefully, accelerate. Such leadership is more essential than ever.

Image credit: Pexels

Amy Augustine is the senior director of the corporate program at Ceres, a nonprofit sustainability organization mobilizing the world’s largest investors and companies to take stronger action on climate change, water scarcity and other global sustainability challenges.

In late February, California's almond orchards awaken from their winter dormancy, transforming more than a million acres of fertile valley soil into a low canopy of pink and white blossoms ready for pollination and another season's harvest.

Commercial almond production accounts for  $5.3 billion of the state's $47.1 billion in agricultural output (2015), second only to milk and cream. If you eat almonds, it's likely they came from here.

But almonds face many stressors. Finally emerging from a protracted drought, California’s water challenges are far from over. Arguably even more foreboding a challenge than water scarcity is the case of the missing wild bee.

“Bees are critical to the environment, supporting one-third of the world’s crops, including ingredients that are used in more than one-third of Häagen-Dazs ice cream flavors,” said Alex Placzek, director of the Häagen-Dazs ice cream brand.

Unlike water, there are relatively simple, effective and literally shovel-ready strategies to help bring the bees back.

"By being proactive and getting involved on the farms of our suppliers," Placzek said in a press statement, "We are staying true to our journey that began nearly 10 years ago to ensure that bees can continue to thrive and enrich the planet.”

TriplePundit recently sent one of its intrepid reporters to find out more about the plight of the pollinator, its impact on agriculture, and how key partnerships between researchers, farmers and food brands like Häagen-Dazs are beginning to reverse the troubling trend of vanishing wild bee populations.

A city boy goes to the country

I meet my group in Oakland, California, for the two-hour drive into the Central Valley, one of the most productive agricultural regions in the world. Along with Placzek, we are joined by Eric Lee-Mäder and Dr. Hillary Sardiñas, both from the Xerces Society, a global nonprofit focusing on invertebrate conservation working closely with Häagen-Dazs on pollinator habitat restoration.

The day is bright and sunny, perfect for a high-noon almond investigation at Russell Harris Farms of Chowchilla, California (a.k.a the "Almond Company"). The 9,000-acre operation started when Francis Harris moved his family from Alabama to California during the Depression-era migration of farmers from the Dust Bowl plains of the American Midwest.

The far moved from Francis to his son, Marion, and now his grandson, Russell. The Harris enterprise has since grown into a large, vertically-integrated farming operation, but Russell and his family remain hands-on in its day-to-day operation. Russell believes "the best fertilizer on a farm is my own footsteps."

It's good for a city boy, given the opportunity, to see firsthand where his afternoon handful of almonds comes from.

Monocrop mismatch: Pollinators in a catch-22

If the American Midwest is the breadbasket of the nation, the Great Valley of California is its Garden of Eden, producing most of the country’s fruits, vegetables and nuts. California’s geology and range of habitat make it among the best places on earth to grow food. Endemic to the region are an estimated 1,600 species of native bees, pollinating a vast wilderness of flowering plants, a rich tapestry of diversity unique to California and the West Coast. Or so it was.

Pressed into an intense cycle of intense agriculture, for seven decades the loamy soil of the valley has been the foundation of the region's growing industrial-scale agriculture. Pollination is the linchpin to this formidable economic and agricultural engine, but the very intensity of the agricultural output threatens the wild bee population upon which it ultimately depends.   

In a paper published in the Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences (PNAS), entitled "Modeling the status, trends, and impacts of wild bee abundance in the United States," researchers mapped trends in wild bee abundance based on recent land conversion and overlayed that data on agricultural demand for pollination services across the country. What they found was a pollinator catch-22. The crops that depend most on pollination directly correlate to low wild bee populations.

“Between 2008 and 2013," the researchers wrote, "modeled bee abundance declined across 23 percent of U.S. land area. This decline was generally associated with conversion of natural habitats to row crops.

“We identify 139 counties where low bee abundances correspond to large areas of pollinator-dependent crops. These areas of mismatch between supply (wild bee abundance) and demand (cultivated area) for pollination comprise 39 percent of the pollinator-dependent crop area in the United States.”

To make up for this mismatch, farmers are forced to import bees. Lots of bees.

Bees on the move

As much as 90 percent of the available U.S. commercial honeybee hives are imported into the valley for pollination (some reports put that at nearly 100 percent for this season's crop). Concentrating so much of the bee population into one region risks the entire nation's supply of bees to viruses, pathogens and disease.

A thriving wild bee population maintains essential biodiversity vital for sustaining agricultural production. As Debra Chase put it in an article for The David Vanguard, we are "flying on the wings of pollinators."

The "forgotten species"

Bees are a keystone species, Lee-Mäder explained. Despite the critical role bees and other pollinators play in the intricate web of life, invertebrates "are the forgotten species," he said.

While the cute, cuddly, and charismatic species attract much of our conservation attention, Lee-Mäder cautions that without greater efforts to conserve invertebrates and their habitats, the larger struggle to perpetuate biodiversity will fall short.

The cause of the sudden onset of Colony Collapse Disorder in 2006 remains a bit of a mystery, a phenomenon where working bees abandon their hive and its queen. But part of the mystery may be due to our own disregard to their critical ecological niche. A study co-authored by researchers at the University of California, Davis, points to this dilemma of neglect:

"Despite their high diversity and importance for humankind," the researchers report, "invertebrates are often neglected in biodiversity conservation policies."

Among the several impediments to pollinator conservation, the report states three key areas of concern:

1. "Invertebrates and their ecological services are mostly unknown to the general public (the public dilemma"


2. "Policymakers and stakeholders are mostly unaware of invertebrate conservation problems (the political dilemma)"


3. "Basic science on invertebrates is scarce and underfunded (the scientific dilemma)"

Häagen-Dazs uses its unique position in the marketplace to take on each of those points. Starting in 2009 with the Häagen-Dazs Loves Honey Bees campaign, the company supported research and public awareness, and is now working closely with key stakeholders to put into action solutions.

"Premium" is a core tenet of the Häagen-Dazs brand. Sourcing the best ingredients for customers to enjoy is its unique sales proposition. It's what loyal customers come to expect. A healthy brand directly correlates to healthy, functioning ecosystems -- even in the midst of the vast mono-crops of the Central Valley.

It can start with a hedgerow.

Hedgerows, stacked benefits

Meandering for six miles along the dirt road bordering plots of almond trees at Harris Farms stretches a hedgerow made up of 11,000 native and drought-tolerant plants, one of the largest privately-funded native pollinator habitats in the country.

Native plants for native bees, among the almond trees. Everybody wins. These are what Lee-Mäder referred to as the "stacked benefits" benefits of implementing "habitat-based intervention" strategies. It seems deceptively simple, but the simplicity is based on science, he told 3p.

For centuries, hedgerows have been home to bees and native wildlife of all sorts. Hedgerows provide natural pest suppression. Less chemical pesticide offers a healthier environment for more wild bees to come to the hedgerow.

As it matures, the hedgerow also protects from wind and soil erosion.

Whatever the risks of planting the six-mile hedgerow, Harris Farms is willing to enthusiastically take them on. Typically, the return on investment in planting such native habitat takes only a few years. The benefits will accrue indefinitely.

As for Häagen-Dazs, the company can tell customers exactly where the almonds in their favorite ice cream come from: right here at Harris Farms. And it's all supported by science, giving researchers like Lee-Mäder and Dr. Sardiñas access to real-world trials of restorative intervention.

Sustainable agriculture: Back to the future

The message of the day wasn’t just about almonds, but the very future of agriculture. Much of California's $47 billion in agricultural output depends on pollination. If ever there were a canary in a coal mine, the wild bee in the almond patch is it.

Maybe the big secret is that it wasn't always this way. The decline of wild bees didn't start 10 years ago with Colony Collapse Disorder. Gene Brandi, president of the American Beekeeping Federation, says that bee populations declined by 50 percent in the past 50 years. Habitat loss, poor nutrition, toxins and the stress of long-distance forced migration are the chief causes.  

The most consequential change in our food system, at least as far back as the start of agriculture, has happened since the end of the Second World War. In our rush to industrialize agriculture, we started to neglect the services that nature already provides.

So, in the end, the "future of agriculture," says Lee-Mäder, is partly taking a step into the past.

Full disclosure: the ice cream bar was delicious!

Images courtesy of Gani Pinero Photography LLC./Häagen-Dazs, Jessa Kay Cruz/Xerces Society. Used with permissions, all rights reserved.

Whatever one may think about the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and its penchant for making headlines, more NGOs may want to consider the latest tactic employed by the animal rights group.

Last week the Canadian luxury outfitter and retailer Canada Goose celebrated its IPO after 60 years in business. And it turns out one of its first investors is PETA.

Granted, PETA's ownership in the company is microscopic. The organization said it purchased about 230 shares on the first day the company went public – about $4,000 worth of Canada Goose’s equity. It said it bought the stock in order to speak at annual shareholder meetings and, more importantly, to submit shareholder resolutions.

PETA says ownership in Canada Goose is important in order to convince the company to eliminate what activists say is needless animal cruelty.

Business Insider suggested that PETA lost about $250 after the first day of Canada Goose’s stock trading. But that will hardly discourage the organization, which objects to the outdoor apparel company’s use of goose down and coyote fur in its products.

“PETA is calling on consumers to reject Canada Goose’s cruelty to coyotes and geese and to invest in kindness by buying vegan clothing instead,” Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman said in a public statement describing the group’s embrace of shareholder activism.

PETA’s playbook follows the lead of the Humane Society, one of the leading animal welfare organizations in the U.S.

A few years ago, the D.C.-based NGO leveraged its 750 shares of Tysons Food stock to reduce the suffering of livestock animals within the company's supply chain. The Humane Society worked with the Methodist Church and an ethical investments firm to introduce a shareholder proposal to request that Tyson cease the use of sow gestation crates. Months later, the company (and one of its largest competitors, Smithfield Foods) urged its pork suppliers to find another way to house their hogs.

Religious orders, including the famous Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia, have long used stock purchases to influence corporate policies through the power of shareholder resolutions. Long an irritant to many public company executives and directors, the Sisters of St. Francis most recent quest was the filing of proposals ahead of Wells Fargo’s annual shareholders meeting. The order’s nuns asked for more accountability from the company after a year of scandals rocked the bank, from allegedly bending military laws to the 2 million “fake accounts” fiasco.

These sisters are not shy about taking on climate action, either. Emboldened by Pope Francis’ aggressive stance on climate change, the nuns also helped draft shareholder proposals at Chevron’s and ExxonMobil’s annual meetings. Those proposals lost after the proxy votes were counted – and such proposals usually do, overwhelmingly – but for organizations ranging from the Sisters of St. Francis to PETA, launching such tactics is more about the long-term need to raise awareness and fight for what they believe is right.

As of press time, Canada Goose has not responded to PETA’s chess move. But this is not the first time the company and the animal rights group have clashed.

PETA jeered several years ago when then-member of parliament Justin Trudeau, who now serves as Canada's prime minister, sent out a Christmas card showing his family in fur-lined Canada Goose garb, resulting in a debate over the ethics and sustainability of fur.

Image credit: Canada Goose

Not all of the Middle East is blessed (or cursed) with rich reserves of hydrocarbons. Egypt is one example of the disparities in wealth and opportunity that are found between the Mediterranean shores and the Strait of Hormuz.

The country hoped it could find some opportunity in the massive Zohr “supergiant” gas field. But those revenues, coupled with Egypt’s notorious corruption, will hardly be enough to lift many of the country’s citizens out of poverty.

In addition, Egypt’s already scarce resources face more strain as the country’s population has surged to over 90 million. The increase, by many accounts, came at a clip of 2 million a year, thanks in part to the country’s high birth rate -- which ranges anywhere from 2.8 to 3.5 children per person, depending on the source cited.

And analysts say Egypt’s population will continue to grow, approaching 120 million by 2030, and could even double current figures in 50 years. With a poverty rate around 28 percent, and per-capita income ($12,100) hovering between Mongolia and Albania, Egypt will need to produce even more water, food and electricity if its people will even have a shot at living in tolerable conditions.

The problem is that the Nile River Valley, which sustained Egypt since before the reign of the pharaohs, is at a tipping point. The vast majority of the country’s citizens live in the lower Nile Valley and delta regions, which together only comprise 3.5 percent of Egypt’s land mass – the rest is, for the most part, harsh and inhospitable desert.

While 70 percent of the Nile’s water flow originates in Ethiopia, 200 years of development has resulted in what is now less than 10 percent of the Nile’s water actually reaching the Mediterranean.

According to a study launched by the Geological Society of America (GSA), the combination of sea-level rise and the lowering of the delta region’s land due to the increased deposits of sediment spells doom for Egypt’s agricultural sector. The GSA’s research suggests that by the end of this century, as many as 25 miles of the delta’s coastline could be lost, turning much of what was once Egypt’s rich soil into a saline disaster area.

Compounding Egypt’s struggles is the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), which by most press accounts is close to completion. The massive hydroelectric project, itself subjected to a fair share of geopolitical problems, could exacerbate Egypt’s water woes. The same GSA study estimates that once the dam is fully operational, the flow of fresh water disrupted by Ethiopia along the Nile to Egypt could crater as much as 25 percent.

That impending news comes as Egyptians have long confronted water scarcity. Most of the country’s fresh water is sourced from this iconic river, but the average citizen’s water share is approximately 660 cubic meters, far from the 2,800 cubic meters enjoyed during the 1960s.

The United Nations says that when annual water supplies fall below 1,000 cubic meters per person, a country has plunged into water scarcity. In fact, Egypt is rapidly approaching “absolute scarcity” by these accounts. At this current rate, Egypt’s water poverty could render most of the country uninhabitable by the dawn of the next century.

Egypt has many plans on its drawing board to address these problems. Much of the country’s focus is on the redirection of water from Lake Nasser, the massive reservoir created by the completion of the Aswan High Dam in the 1960s.

Lake Nasser has long been an inefficient storage solution, as the GSA study noted that it loses as much as 14 percent of its water annually to seepage and evaporation. One project includes the diversion of some of the lake’s storage to a “new” Nile Valley, but as the Guardian reported, that tactic prompted accusations of land grabbing.

Egypt’s indigenous Nubians, many of whom who were relocated after their ancestral homelands were flooded by the High Aswan Dam, say they have been banned from lands that are rightfully theirs. Many are protesting what they see as the Egyptian government’s disregard for human rights by selling land that is rightfully theirs to well-connected investors who are willing to pay a high price.

Renewables could also help reduce the stress imposed on Egypt’s water and energy infrastructure. Abu Dhabi’s Masdar, for example, has invested in both utility-scale and off-grid solar projects as part of the United Arab Emirates' foreign aid program in Egypt. The country has huge potential for the harvesting of solar power, but critics argue that a corrupt government has killed off what was just a few years ago a promising industry.

Meanwhile, Reuters reported that Egypt’s vast agricultural output, which feeds much of Northern Africa and the Middle East, has been saddled by illegal construction – which will complicate the country’s ability to feed, power and replenish itself with water in the near future.

Image credit: Shaimaa Ahmed Saleh/Flickr

By Heidi Travis

First-person narrative can be powerful. After a moving chant to drumbeat and self-introductions in their native languages, SXSW panelists Jade Begay, Sarain Carson-Fox, Clayton Thomas Muller and Eryn Wise shared their Standing Rock experiences. (If you're not familiar with the controversy at Standing Rock and the planned Dakota Access Pipeline, you can read 3p's coverage here.)

Upon finishing his story, Muller jokingly, “This panel should have been called ‘Because, North Dakota’ rather than 'Standing Rock Awakens the World.'” Their stories help illuminate the many reasons why indigenous people should be commissioned to chronicle their own experiences. This topic also follows a common thread throughout this week’s interactive sessions at the SXSW Conference: storytelling.

First-person narrative is thoughtful and allows the listener to connect through empathy and understand a different perspective. To uphold the theme of a personalized storyline, links to information by indigenous media are provided where possible throughout. In relation to the ongoing threat to indigenous people’s lands and values, let’s explore from the panelist’s viewpoint: what’s helping the movement, the reasons why this is important, and how to support the cause.

What is working?

Like most situations, there is something to be learned from the experience. First, an unprecedented number of tribes have come together to stand up and speak out on environmental protection. A collaborative effort means many groups are combining energies to fight against destructive corporate greed. This isn’t the first time Indigenous Americans created an encampment to bring attention to and fight oppression. However, the gathering at Standing Rock is significant in that it is the largest native gathering in our time, possibly on record.

Large groups of non-indigenous people are showing support. Clayton Thomas Muller shared that the use of social media to check in -- in support of the action -- sends a powerful message of solidarity. He pointed out that many of the protests happening recently have a lot in common as “intersectional social movements that are anti-oppression, anti-racism and anti-colonialism,” as these injustices are being condemned. There is a common understanding that promoting indigenous rights also equates to the support of environmental justice.

Technology is also enabling people to support efforts through donation links embedded within social media campaigns. This popular and useful ‘donate’ button technology has been immensely important to funding causes like legal representation for Standing Rock.

In addition, tribal members are standing up to create a better community in an attempt to end the cycle of poverty. Leaders are emerging and sharing strategies to rebuild poor areas into sustainable, thriving communities.

Why does this matter?

Unfortunately the enumeration of history and much of the mainstream narrative has come from outside native culture. Moreover, corporations continue to offer misleading and often false information on impacts to people and planet in order to meet their own objectives.

According to the Standing Rock panelists, the consensus is that the media outlets covering the encampments arrived with a framework already created. Panelists attested that by doing this, the story being told was less authentic and lacked honesty.

Many of the people who were interviewed felt insulted by media descriptions of their lives -- using a single traumatic life event to define them. While defining people by the conflict in North Dakota may prompt sympathy (or shock), it does nothing to inform the public about the complexity of their lives. As complex humans, protestors felt no real connection to their own story when written so simply.

Many who followed the protests may not realize in April 2016, the first grassroots camp launched near the Cannon Ball River at Sacred Stone. The original encampment’s purpose was to peacefully demonstrate against the pipeline crossing the river. Water crossing permits were issued by U..S Army Corps of Engineers in July despite the potential negative impact on the environment.

Due to this setback, a larger camp was created on the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. According to Erin Wise, who was at the camp for five months, after permits were granted the camp grew to thousands of native youth protesting in solidarity. Between April and September, there was no media coverage.

Once the media arrived in September, the people in the camp were not asked to talk about why the protest was important to their lives, values or culture. Erin shared that reporters were more interested in when the next ‘trauma’ would happen -- like the instances where people were injured from mace or dog attacks – and exploiting sacred traditions for their story, rather than asking those involved if they could share these in a way that honored them.

Panelist Sarain Carson-Fox, a TV host for Viceland whose cell phone case boldly read RESIST, advocates for people to have the ability to cover their own stories. She described that many people might “want to resist in their own way”. Standing Rock is covered by Viceland in a show called Rise, about indigenous “people protecting their homelands and rising up against colonization,” says Carson-Fox. Part of the series covered Rio Doce – possibly Brazil’s worst environmental disaster. Carson-Fox shared her shock of seeing the devastation from that mining disaster and shared how disheartened she felt at arriving in North Dakota to see how poorly her brothers and sisters were being treated as they tried to prevent a similar type of disaster. It’s an unfortunate fact that many pipelines spill. It’s just a matter of when...

Furthermore, both policy makers and corporations continue to lack respect for the rights of their land. Panelists also called out many related issues that are driving protestors including colonialism, racism, oppression, indigenous rights, and environmental justice. Presently, this also includes the historically dishonored Ft. Laramie Treaty. This treaty assigned land areas in North Dakota to tribes and is still debated legally and politically! A complete lack of social and environmental justice is conveyed by assessments of impact as shown by “Confidential Memo: Dakota Access LLC Knowingly Dismissed Standing Rock Impacts.”

What can you do to help?

1. As a journalist or just a mere human, listen first and think about the context of the story you're engaged with.


2. Fund technology through donations or a shared economy system so people have the means to tell their story. Jade Begay hopes people will entrust native organizations with platforms, grant funding, and share media tools.


3. Build partnerships to coordinate efforts to cover information. According to Muller, it would be beneficial to partner with an experienced organization or University to help train people to effectively share in their own way. He shared an example of a project: Indigenous Rising Media would like to create and maintain an archive of stories for future generations.


4. Lobby financial institutions. Consumers should put pressure on banks to pull out of socially bad investments. Explore opportunities to change your banking institution to one that isn’t funding pipeline projects. So far 63 mill. / 6 bill. has been divested according to Muller (especially from European Banks).


5. Banks should consider a adding a section on environmental liability to the funding application process. Projects like this include a risk that isn’t currently considered. Companies should be held responsible for cleaning up after themselves and therefore undertake responsibility – not government (ie. consumer taxes).


6. “Separate oil and state”. “Exxon should not run state department” – Muller.


7. Call your representative and tell them that the government should not be allowing companies to explore in our protected regions - National parks, arctic, or under native lands (where a significant percent of fossil fuels are estimated to exist).

The problem with the implementation of these pipelines goes well beyond the direct threat to water and ecosystem. We should all be concerned with how and why policies and regulations are failing to protect our people and the environment from this type of injustice. If all people have access to tools to tell their own stories, we might be able to listen and understand one another a little bit better. Think about how you can help create access for native people to communicate their own stories through the landscape of their own values. It’s both powerful and empowering to be able to tell your own story.

Image courtesy of the author

Heidi Travis is a full-time planner, designer, and lover of being active in the beautiful outdoors. Heidi recently made a move to discover everything Austin has to offer after growing up in Atlanta, enjoying life in the mountains of Asheville, and appreciating the convenience of living in a city like Philadelphia. While in Philadelphia, she earned her Masters in Environmental Studies at Penn and enjoyed biking to work, as well as being involved in many campus sustainability projects. You can follow her on twitter @heidi_travis15

Another week in office for U.S. President Donald Trump, another patch of grey hair for environmentalists and social justice advocates the world over.

The hottest news items centered around Trump's proposed budget and the tax return revelation that wasn't. But that's far from all that happened this week. Don't feel badly if you don't know. Staying on top of the new administration is turning into an Olympic sport.

Luckily, we're stretching those muscles so you don't have to. I'd make a "Keeping Up with the Kardashians" joke, but honestly I'm too exhausted. Let's just get right down to it.

Budget drops like an anvil

Trump's proposed budget dropped in the wee hours of Thursday morning. By the start of the business day, it was all most people could talk about.

The proposal calls for a boost in funding for the departments of Defense and Homeland Security. It also puts a $2 billion downpayment on that "big, beautiful" border wall. All other federal agencies will see their funding cut, some drastically.

Programs related to climate science, public health and poverty alleviation are among the hardest hit. Later on Thursday, Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney defended cuts to climate programs -- calling them "a waste of your money."

3p's Leon Kaye took a closer look at the Trump budget. You can read his coverage here.

EPA faces steep cuts

Drastic cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency were in the works weeks before the budget was released. Insiders initially projected a 25 percent cut to EPA funding. The most recent figure tops 30 percent.

Among other changes, the budget "discontinues" $100 million in funding for several climate change programs, reported Timothy Cama and Devin Henry of the Hill. This includes enforcement of Barack Obama-era climate rules, climate change research and support for international climate programs.

Insiders cautioned that such drastic cuts will impede the EPA's ability to protect air and water. Others warned it could endanger public health.

But not everyone is sad to see the agency cut down to size. Perennial climate change denier and snowball aficionado Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) was quick to add his two cents. In a TV appearance on Thursday, Inhofe accused the EPA of distributing "propaganda" that is "brainwashing our kids." Nice.

Plans revived for nuclear waste dump in Nevada

Trump's budget doles out $120 million to revive plans for a nuclear waste repository in Nevada. But there's one problem: Local stakeholders don't want it. Like, at all.

Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.) came out quickly in opposition to the revival of the proposed Yucca Mountain site.

“Washington needs to understand what Nevada has been saying for years: We will not be the nation’s nuclear waste dump,” Heller said, as quoted by the Hill. “This project was ill-conceived from the beginning and has already flushed billions of taxpayer dollars down the drain.”

Other lawmakers joined Heller in opposition to the plan, including Democrats Rep. Dina Titus and Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, both of Nevada.

Trump asks energy companies if U.S. should stay in the Paris agreement

Advocates say the Paris climate agreement is the single biggest step the global community has taken to address climate change thus far.

It represents the collective work of nearly 200 nations from all corners of the world. These governments brought the agreement into force months ahead of schedule. And many are already making progress on fulfilling their commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

But never mind those scientists and policy experts working tirelessly from the fjords of Norway to the islands of the South Pacific. The Trump administration would rather hear what oil and gas companies have to say.

The administration has been contacting U.S. energy companies to ask them about their views on the agreement, Reuters reported on Wednesday. Two sources who spoke anonymously to the paper said many energy companies voiced support for the agreement.

This isn't too surprising. Even ExxonMobil called the agreement "an important step forward" when it came into force last year. But, also unsurprisingly, several companies said they would "support reducing U.S. commitments in the deal," according to the sources.

Obama fracking rule will get the axe

It seems this administration gets a whole lot done in the dead of night. Justice Department lawyers filed documents with the Denver-based Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit late Wednesday. The contents? A forthcoming repeal of an Obama-era fracking rule. (In case you're not familiar with fracking, short for hydraulic fracturing, you can find more info here.)

Obama issued the first federal regulations on fracking back in June of 2015. The regs hit legal trouble almost from the start. A U.S. District Judge issued a temporary injunction on the rule a few months later.

The legal battle continued to unfold in the following years, with the Tenth Circuit court being the prime battleground. But this last move may be the final nail in the coffin. Attorneys said the Department of Interior will formally propose a repeal within 90 days, reports Timothy Cama of the Hill.

See ya, fuel standards!

The president paid a visit to Michigan this week. Many speculated that he'd use the occasion to announce a rollback of Obama-era vehicle efficiency standards -- and that's just what he did.

Obama bolstered the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard in 2010, requiring vehicles to average over 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. The administration tasked the EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration with reviewing the rule. Another Obama regulation related to greenhouse gas emissions from transportation is also on the chopping block.

3p's Gina-Marie Cheeseman unpacked the decision and its impacts. You can read her coverage here.

Climate change impacts? Pfft... those are for losers

The feds consider a bevy of factors before making government decisions. This includes an environmental review process. The Obama administration directed federal agencies to include climate change impacts in their environmental reviews of new legislation or federally-backed projects.

But that's all about to change, according to recent news reports.

Trump is poised to sign a "sweeping directive" that will remove climate impacts as a factor in federal agency decisions, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday. The change centers around the government's use of a metric known as the social cost of carbon. A federal court upheld the use of this metric last year, but it seems the days of carefully weighing such decisions in court are far behind us.

EPA to reconsider chemical plant safety rule

In December, the Obama administration passed a new rule to mitigate accidental spills at chemical plants. Sounds innocuous enough, right? Such disasters are PR nightmares for chemical companies. Not to mention all the, you know, people, who could see their water and land sullied by a spill. But apparently the regulation is more controversial than we thought.

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt delayed the rule earlier this week and "kicked off a formal process to consider repealing it," reported our friend Timothy Cama over at the Hill. The decision came two weeks after a coalition of industry groups petitioned Pruitt for a repeal.

“As an agency, we need to be responsive to concerns raised by stakeholders regarding regulations so facility owners and operators know what is expected of them,” Pruitt said late Monday. Congress is considering legislation by our good buddy Sen. Inhofe and Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) to overturn the rule, Cama reported.

Trump doubles down on Obama's drilling folly

Barack Obama compiled a strong environmental legacy in the final years of his presidency. But, as 3p's Nithin Coca reports, "One glaring black mark remains on his record: He oversaw a huge expansion in domestic oil drilling."

And while the Trump administration seems hell-bent on dismantling Obama-era programs related to climate and efficiency, the glut of domestic oil and the rise of 'Saudi America' are poised to continue.

Trump plans to keep the previous administration’s moves to expand offshore drilling in place. Needless to say, environmental groups are not happy.

“Bottom line, we think this is a terrible idea, whether it was done by the Obama administration or the Trump administration,” Athan Manuel, director of the Sierra Club’s Lands Protection Program, told the Washington Post. “It’s time to keep oil in the ground.”

The bottom line

For many, the past few weeks have seen uncertainty surrounding the new administration give way to straight-up panic. But amidst the questions, there's one thing we know for certain: This is only the beginning.

And just like everyone's favorite fatherless "Game of Thrones" character, as the night gathers, so our watch begins. We'll have our eyes fixed on the horizon of our newswires -- for better or for worse -- and we'll keep whittling it down so you don't have to.

Stay tuned for more, if you can bear it.

Image credit: Flickr/Diego Cambiaso