Does Florida's Land Acquisition Trust Fund really require land acquisition?

/
Wacissa River, Florida.  Photo: FWC

Wacissa River, Florida.  Photo: FWC

Last November 75% of Florida voters supported Constitutional Amendment 1, the Florida Land and Water Conservation Initiative.  The amendment was designed to ensure that at least one-third of existing documentary excise tax revenues would be allocated to the Land Acquisition Trust Fund.  The Fund, in turn, would be used to promote conservation and natural resources, primarily through the acquisition of lands for conservation.

Before the Florida legislature abruptly adjourned last month before adopting a budget, supporters of Amendment 1 were outraged by the way in which lawmakers proposed spending Amendment 1's $750 million conservation funding.  Budgets in both the House and Senate propose spending conservation funding on existing operational costs.  The House budget proposal includes funds for staff salaries and firefighting equipment, while the Senate budget funds new patrol vehicles and fish farming regulations.  Supporters of the amendment claim those expenses aren't permitted:

"I don't think the words 'Land Acquisition Trust Fund' could be any more clear," said Will Abberger, chairman of Florida's Water and Land Legacy, the committee that sponsored the amendment. "It's not the 'land management trust fund.' It's not the 'existing agencies operations trust fund.' It's the Land Acquisition Trust Fund."

The sponsor committee claims that out of the $750 million available, only $8-10 million is reserved for the acquisition of land for parks and wildlife areas.  The Speaker of the House believes that is enough to satisfy Amendment 1's objectives:

"We should make sure we can maintain the 5.3 million acres of conservation lands we already own. We believe land should be purchased for strategic reasons, such as wildlife corridors and connecting existing state lands."

Unfortunately for the sponsoring committee, there is some ambiguity in the actual language of the amendment.  It sets aside funding "to finance or refinance" several broad categories of conservation work, including the acquisition and improvement of land; wildlife management areas; lands that protect water resources and drinking water sources; lands in the Everglades Agricultural Area and the Everglades Protection Area; beaches and shores; outdoor recreation lands, including recreational trails, parks, and urban open space; and rural landscapes, working farms, and ranches.

The broad nature of the amendment leaves ample room to interpret existing operational costs as viable uses of the Land Acquisition Trust Fund.  That operational spending would seem to violate the spirit of the amendment may have little bearing: even the ballot summary statement was clear that "management" of conservation lands would be fair game.

While lobbying continues before a special session is convened in June to finalize the budget, amendment supporters might consider focusing the debate on outcomes, not inputs.  Land acquisition might not by itself promote conservation, just as operational spending is not per se  unproductive.  An effective conservation framework in Florida requires lands that are thoughtfully managed to advance conservation goals.  So instead of bemoaning operational expenditures, it might behoove amendment supporters to ask for more detail instead:  

  • Will staff salary allocations make new hires in areas where expertise is lacking or merely cover the existing bureaucracy?  
  • What kind of "technology and information services" will be provided to the Department of Environmental Protection?  
  • Will firefighting equipment purchased by the fund prioritize the protection of conservation areas?  
  • Given that sea level rise presents a monumental challenge to coastal communities, will the fund be used to finance climate change adaptation measures Florida's cities are begging for from the state?

If lawmakers can't be forthcoming about proposed allocations, then amendment supporters are right to be skeptical.  Conservation isn't all about acquiring land, but if funds are being channeled toward operations and management instead, it's fair to ask how improved institutional capacities will produce the conservation outcomes that are at the heart of Amendment 1.  

Lake Runnymede Conservation Area.  Photo: Andrew T. Sullivan

Lake Runnymede Conservation Area.  Photo: Andrew T. Sullivan

Disaster Law and Displacement in Nepal, Ctd

/

Fresh off its 7.8 magnitude earthquake on April 25, a 7.3 magnitude earthquake struck Nepal today about 80km to the east of the capital, Kathmandu.  The aftershock further exacerbates the displacement of populations who have been without meaningful shelter for weeks.

As detailed after the April 25 quake, building codes and construction standards have an enormous impact on the final death tolls.  In this case, it appears that many children were spared from the quake because the Nepalese government had wisely chosen to close what schools and colleges remained upright until May 14 in order to inspect their integrity.  While sustained school closures present short-term disruptions to youth development and education, the regulation in this case may have been worth the short-term costs.  

As if the April 25 quake wasn't enough, this is another reminder to rapidly developing countries in the region to get their building codes, construction standards, and disaster management plans in order.  

Environmental Peacebuilding in the South China Sea, Ctd

/

Now that recent satellite images have revealed the extent to which Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and China are rapidly reclaiming coral reefs in the South China Sea, the countries are scrambling to come up with valid legal justifications for the brinkmanship.  

The Philippines is denying wrong-doing by claiming that its reclamation work constitutes maintenance, distinguishable from large-scale construction that would clearly implicate China:

The Philippine foreign minister denied China's accusations of recent massive reclamation, saying the country had done minor, but legal, repair and maintenance within its 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone in the disputed area some years ago.  "We were doing some repairs and maintenance after the Declaration of Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) but repairs and maintenance is allowed," Albert del Rosario said.  "Massive reclamation is not." 

Vietnam, so far, has kept a low profile since new images were released showing expanded construction in the Spratly Islands chain.  China's approach has been surprisingly proactive, acknowledging their own extensive reclamation efforts but framing them as necessary steps to fulfill obligations to the international community.  Its territorial expansions, supposedly, will be used to facilitate disaster relief, ocean and weather monitoring, and maritime search and rescue.  China even invited the United States to use their facilities for those purposes "when conditions are right."  

It is a shrewd argument that justifies China's reef building on the one hand, while undercutting the claims of its neighbors since they are not major powers with commensurate obligations to the international community.  If providing public services were a genuine objective it might provide some assurances to the United States and other countries that are concerned there may be impediments to navigation and overflight as a result of the territorial claims, though China could always claim "conditions aren't right" for joint use.  Unfortunately most of the installations appear militarized or have potential for militarization.  Even if that weren't the case, the real value of the reclamation work may not the be the installations themselves, but the maritime rights that would attach - in addition to fisheries and tourism, the waters of the South China Sea have untold oil and gas reserves.  

Image: CSIS Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative

Image: CSIS Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative

Links I Liked

/
  1. How Western media would cover Baltimore if it happened in a foreign country (h/t Duncan Green)
    • "The United Kingdom expressed concern over the troubling turn of events in America in the last several months. The country’s foreign ministry released a statement: “We call on the American regime to rein in the state security agents who have been brutalizing members of America’s ethnic minority groups. The equal application of the rule of law, as well as the respect for human rights of all citizens, black or white, is essential for a healthy democracy.” Britain has always maintained a keen interest in America, a former colony."
  2. A human right to LSD in Norway?  (h/t Marginal Revolution)
  3. 6 tips on disaster relief giving.  (h/t Chris Blattman)
  4. Guide to building your personal brand.  Ouch.
  5. Whole Foods to open discount chain next year.  

 

 

Ghani's Dilemma: Land Reform in Afghanistan

/
Ghani's Dilemma: Land Reform in Afghanistan

When Ashraf Ghani was elected President of Afghanistan in September 2014, he inherited a country in turmoil.  The election results sparked a political crisis challenging Ghani's right to power, the Taliban was ramping up operations just as NATO troops were preparing to withdraw, relations with key neighbors (e.g., Pakistan) were shaky, and the economy was still reliant on the illegal opium trade.  Afghanistan ranked 169th on the UN's Human Development Index.  Here's a less publicized but just as important problem facing Afghanistan today: it has a weak legal framework for land administration and management.  

Effective ownership of land provides economic and political opportunities to landowners, stability to the economy and government, and reinforces state functions like tax collection and security.  The absence of an effective legal framework for land does the opposite, weakening the economy, corrupting politics, and threatening security.  A 3-part series on land theft in Afghanistan - produced by the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA)'s Rule of Law Unit - claims that weak land administration is not just a critical issue in Afghanistan; it may be the most critical issue in Afghanistan:

Whether related to the opium trade, extractive industries, or land transactions, land conflict drivers likely affect a far greater proportion of the Afghan people on a daily basis than the ongoing military conflict...Land ownership disputes are estimated to be the cause of over 70% of all serious crimes (murder and crimes of violence) in Afghanistan.

So far Part I and Part II have been released, and the research effort is impressive.  Some key findings:

  • Most land in Afghanistan is not titled or registered in any formal legal sense.  The Land Management Law of 2008 provides a path towards ownership for individuals with customary or traditional land tenure, but the bureaucratic requirements and administrative costs needed to establish ownership are unrealistic.
  • Assuming customary tenure can be shown, formal title is no guarantee of effective ownership since many institutions provide some claim to title.
  • Property laws are skewed toward protection of the state, not individuals.  Lands are often claimed by the government (and often corruptly) without compensation provided to landowners.
  • The various land dispute resolution mechanisms that exist - be they formal, informal, or a hybrid - encourage forum shopping and create ambiguity.
  • Land grabbing is not criminalized.  In theory a penalty of 2 years can be imposed, but criminal land grabbing cases must wait until the associated civil case concludes.  To date no criminal prosecution of land grabbing has been recorded, an open invitation to steal land.  

Reforming this system means accepting some rather uncomfortable possibilities. 

Read More

Disaster Law and Displacement in Nepal, Ctd

/
Photo: Domenico

Photo: Domenico

Last week I wrote the following about Nepal's building codes contributing to seismic vulnerability:

Nepal ranks near the bottom in a list of countries on preparedness for natural disasters.  Despite being located on a known fault-line, Kathmandu, like Port au Prince, did not develop stringent building codes, zoning laws, or urbanization management plans to mitigate risk.  What plans do exist have not been enforced. 

And weak building code standards and enforcement did contribute to widespread infrastructural and human losses.  But engineers are starting to find evidence - from buildings that did not collapse - that construction standards may be improving in Nepal.  Simple details like bending steel rods around vertical bands has helped some buildings stay standing, which, while not salvaging the building itself, saved human lives:

These are precisely the construction details that were absent in the wreckage of many of the schools that collapsed on students and teachers in China’s Sichuan Province in 2008.

Miyamoto said Nepal’s two-decade effort to improve building codes is important, but that adoption of new norms and habits by contractors there and in many other developing countries is likely more a function of spreading understanding of why such simple steps make a difference.*

“They have to know why that bend matters,” he said. “A few extra seconds of effort can keep a building from falling on their kids.”

He and others have credited the sustained work of Nepal’s National Society for Earthquake Technology and nonprofit groups such as GeoHazards International in helping spread such insights.

But they are racing the clock in many ways. The same is true around the world.

The need for more stringent building code regulation appears to be getting more attention in nearby India as well, where low, mid, and high-rise buildings share the same minimum building code  standards (h/t Andrew Revkin).

Environmental Peacebuilding in the South China Sea

/
Environmental Peacebuilding in the South China Sea

In recent years the South China Sea has become a fiercely contested region.  China's rise as a regional and global superpower has emboldened an aggressive strategy to claim a larger share of the sea than would otherwise be allowed under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).  While UNCLOS permits countries to exercise exclusive economic jurisdiction over a 200 mile extension from shore, China has claimed an ambiguously explained "9-dash line" that seemingly cuts into the maritime jurisdictions of Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines (see map below the jump).  A 2002 agreeement between Association for Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) called for self-restraint in the area, but recently all countries have participated in an island development arms race to justify maritime and territorial claims.  China, in particular, has been the most aggressive:

In 2011 Chinese patrol boats harassed Vietnamese and Philippine oil-exploration vessels near the Spratlys. In 2012 China occupied Scarborough Shoal after a stand-off with the Philippines, which also has a claim. Last year a Chinese state-owned company sent an offshore oil rig into waters claimed by Vietnam, leading to violent anti-Chinese protests in Vietnamese cities. The rig withdrew months later. China has responded angrily to a case challenging the basis of its claims in the South China Sea which was filed in 2013 by the Philippines at a UN-backed arbitration panel. It has refused to co-operate with the hearings.

The refusal to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Permanent Court of Arbitration under the auspices of UNCLOS is problematic for several reasons.  First, because it erodes the legitimacy and persuasiveness of a treaty if a major nation does not participate.  Second, because without a meaningful legal response the international community has less information with which to understand China's concerns and facilitate dispute resolution.  And finally, because uncertainty over the impending decision of the court is escalating island development ahead of the decision, destroying coral reef habitats.  

The South China Sea has now become a conflict of global concern.  Relations between China and its neighbors (including Japan) have deteriorated; much of the island development appears to be militarized; and the integrity of UNCLOS is being undermined.  The United States is deeply involved, with an interest in countering China's rising maritime influence by pivoting toward warmer relations with Japan, Vietnam, and the Philippines (although the US position that China's 9-dash line is invalid is somewhat undermined by the fact that the US is not a ratified party to UNCLOS).  

Less attention has been paid to the South China Sea environment itself.  In order to stake territorial claims (and the 200 mile exclusive economic zones that may go with them), countries are "reclaiming" shallow coral reef areas by dredging the seafloor in order to build artificial islands.  Shipping channels are cut and infrastructure is built over the reef.  One recently discovered artificial island has grown to accommodate an 82,000 square yard facility.  The land reclamation race only adds to the already fragile condition most reefs in the area find themselves in.  And given that legal jurisdiction is in dispute in the region, it probably goes without saying that fish stocks are plummeting due to overfishing.  Indonesia has resorted to sinking illegal fishing vessels, a move that has been criticized for antagonizing neighbors.  

But while many see the environment as a casualty of the South China Sea dispute, it also represents an opportunity for reconciliation.  

Read More

Why countries need an international volcano response plan, Ctd

/

You may have heard that the Calbuco volcano in southern Chile erupted last week, five days after I wrote about the need for an international volcano response plan to deal with and prepare for the climate impacts of large volcanic events.  The Calbuco eruption is not a large volcanic event by historic standards, but NASA satellite data is starting to show that the eruption's sulfur dioxide may nonetheless have climate impacts because it was injected so high into the stratosphere:

The SO2 total is much lower than the recent Holuhraun eruption, which released about 11–12 teragrams, or 30 to 40 times more than Calbuco. “But the SO2 from Holuhraun was emitted over several months and was mostly confined to the lower troposphere, limiting its climate impacts,” Carn noted. “In terms of climate impacts, Calbuco is probably more significant due to the stratospheric SO2 injection.”

There have already been direct impacts felt in Chile and Argentina, but the potential indirect impacts of sulfur dioxide particles creating a cooling effect could play a disruptive role in upcoming climate change negotiations.  As countries move toward a binding greenhouse gas emission reductions treaty to deal with climate change, now is the time to consider how volcanic cooling effects should be discussed and planned for in the future.  

Image: NASA

Image: NASA

​

Disaster Law and Displacement, Nepal Edition

/
Disaster Law and Displacement, Nepal Edition

Earlier this month I wrote about displacement and disaster in Haiti, highlighting some legal obstacles that were (and still are) frustrating efforts to reduce displaced populations after the 2010 earthquake.  The legal framework was weak on three fronts: domestically, building codes were not optimized for seismic activity and rarely enforced, while property documentation processes were confusing; regionally, while the Dominican Republic pledged aid at first, long-running tensions emerged eventually; and internationally the NGO and intergovernmental community operated without meaningful checks and balances.  

On Saturday, a 7.8 magnitude earthquake struck Nepal, with an epicenter roughly 80 kilometers from the capital and most populous city, Kathmandu.  Compare that to Haiti's 7.0 magnitude earthquake 25 km from Port au Prince, Haiti's capital and most populous city, and the seismology looks similar.  But vulnerability is a product not only of earthquake strength and duration, but population and property preparedness as well.  A comparison between rich and poor countries illustrates the dynamic quite well (see chart below the jump).

So far the impact of the earthquake in Nepal - and immediate relief efforts - appear to be mirroring the Haitian experience.  The death toll (so far) is lower than estimated for the region, but hundreds of thousands of survivors are sprawled across large tent cities near Kathmandu, with power, freshwater, food, and hospital services being stretched thin.  International relief agencies are pouring into the country, and the relief effort will inevitably become a rebuilding project, with familiar echoes of Haiti's infamous "Build Back Better" campaign.   Given the impending transition in Nepal, it's worth comparing the lessons of Haiti's experience with the Nepalese context.  

Low building code standards and enforcement

Nepal ranks near the bottom in a list of countries on preparedness for natural disasters.  Despite being located on a known fault-line, Kathmandu, like Port au Prince, did not develop stringent building codes, zoning laws, or urbanization management plans to mitigate risk.  What plans do exist have not been enforced.  According to The Atlantic's City Lab:

Read More

Links I Liked

/
  1. "Escape or Die." Shipping and piracy are great examples of what can happen when international and domestic legal systems break down.  A remarkable story.
  2. 4 pollution problems the EPA has mostly fixed.
  3. China Adds Equivalent of France's Entire Solar Capacity in Three Months.  Meanwhile, the Chinese Ministry of the Environment is cracking down on hydropower projects, blocking one on the grounds that it threatens a nature preserve.
  4. Theories of Change: Passing Fad or Paradigm Shift?
  5. Marine Le Pen goes to New York.  "It should be pointed out that Le Pen didn’t make TIME’s list of the world’s 100 most influential people because of the way she dresses."

The Politics of Earth Day

/
The Politics of Earth Day

Earlier this month Jonathan Franzen wrote a controversial article pitting climate change against conservation.  His argument is that climate change, admittedly the cardinal environmental issue of our time, overwhelms our green agenda by obfuscating cause and effect relationships.  As a result, it's easy to make every environmental issue a climate change issue because the solutions are so abstract and the culprits so diffuse.  Climate change is everyone's fault, and therefore no one's:

[Climate change] deeply confuses the human brain, which evolved to focus on the present, not the far future, and on readily perceivable movements, not slow and probabilistic developments.  The great hope of the Enlightenment—that human rationality would enable us to transcend our evolutionary limitations—has taken a beating from wars and genocides, but only now, on the problem of climate change, has it foundered altogether.

The question, then, is not whether we should care that climate change is wreaking havoc on the planet.  Of course we should.  The question is whether climate change must be at the very top of every environmentalist's to-do list.  And the answer to that question is no.  I've written about this in the context of droughts, floods, and wildfires, arguing that while climate change is almost certainly exacerbating existing vulnerabilities, public discussion is so focused on the climate change element that not enough attention is being paid to the vulnerabilities that would exist with or without climate change.

The dichotomy Franzen presents between climate change and conservation has been understandably criticized for being misleading, and it's true that climate change mitigation and adaptation often requires conservation of critical ecosystems and conservation efforts often require climate change adaptation.  But it's worth asking whether every conservation effort is best framed as a climate change issue.  

The question matters today because it's Earth Day, engendering abstract thinking about the environment.  It also matters because today President Obama is visiting the Everglades to make his case for climate change action.  That might be a riskier move than it initially appears.  

Read More

Regulating the drought in California, Ctd

/

On the Public Record, a pseudonymous blogger on California water issues, responds to my post outlining some drawbacks to bottom-up water management with an interesting observation on government discourse:

This is the second time we’ve needed people who are employed by universities, not water agencies to tell us this.  There is certainly no will to acknowledge this from within the state bureaucracies.  Local agencies are not magic: some are good, some are inept, some are overwhelmed.  We will find out which ones are which, but we’ll have lost years to the process.
Sacramento Delta.  Photo: Daniel Parks.

Sacramento Delta.  Photo: Daniel Parks.

The stakes are so high in the California water sector I'm not surprised government agencies are keeping their heads down.  Groundwater regulations can ensure some measure of fairness between users and long-term sustainability, but there's no doubt reforms will turn some status quo winners into losers, and some losers into winners.  As a case in point, Maven's Notebook has a blog roundup on this week's California water news which features, in addition to this blog, an article demonstrating the trade-offs between endangered species, urban populations, and agriculture in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.  There isn't an easy solution for water managers: 

Given tight water supplies, there’s little doubt that this additional water flowing from the Delta could have been used for other purposes. But some of the fish species that depend on the Delta are struggling mightily during this drought. Reallocating more water to other uses almost certainly would have caused further environmental harm, and increased the chances of stricter future regulations to protect endangered fish. 

The South Florida Water Management District orchestrates a similar balancing act between water needed for the Everglades, the sugar industry, and coastal populations.  Florida's water management districts are relatively well-funded and staffed, yet groundwater management still presents problems.  Local agencies in California now have to bear the responsibility for making complex trade-offs between groundwater users whether they are prepared for it or not.  Let's hope the legislature gives them the support they need.  

The Environmental Impacts of Marijuana Prohibition

/
The Environmental Impacts of Marijuana Prohibition

It's 4/20, international cannabis appreciation day.  What better time to consider the environmental impacts of marijuana prohibition?  I say prohibition, and not cultivation, because there has already been significant attention paid to the environmental impacts of cultivation.  Mostly these criticisms focus on the anarchic nature of marijuana farming culture, and the extent to which these lawless operations despoil the environment.  Withdrawing water without permits, clearing forested areas, and using fertilizers that run-off into nearby streams are among the impacts, and I'm sure there's truth to that.  But it's worth asking why that is taking place, and what role marijuana laws are playing.  This seems to be one school of thought in response to state measures to regulate marijuana farming:

The marijuana industry has long been the province of lawbreakers, and it seems unlikely that those who have been conducting their business without any legal oversight would readily adopt measures to protect the...environment from the impact of their actions.

Recent history suggests otherwise.  In 2010 Mendocino County and local growers developed a plant registration system that helped farmers and the county comply with environmental laws.  It showed promise until federal marijuana prohibition laws broke up the partnership:

Almost 100 growers participated, but the program was shut down in early 2012, after federal agents raided one of the grows and US Attorney Melinda Haag hinted that she might just take the county to court. Later that year, a federal grand jury subpoenaed the county's zip tie records. 

The environmental impacts of marijuana cultivation might be significant, but they are made worse by forcing otherwise law-abiding farmers out of the regulatory system.  While it's easy to speculate that most marijuana farmers don't have water use permits, it's more difficult to offer a solution that doesn't run afoul of state or federal prohibition laws.  In many cases when marijuana industry entrepreneurs have tried to comply with local or state laws, those efforts back-fired by making it easier for federal prosecutors to identify and prosecute them.  

All that might be coming to an end thanks to an obscure amendment and an ongoing case in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.  

Read More

Regulating the drought in California: the drawbacks of a bottom-up approach

/
Regulating the drought in California: the drawbacks of a bottom-up approach

Much has been written about the ongoing drought in California.  Depending on how you define drought (and that's easier said than done), the current drought might be the worst in 1200 years or one of many similar dry periods the American West has experienced this millennium.  The difference matters, because if the drought is unique and can therefore be blamed on climate change, there is yet another imperative to do something about it (climate change, that is).  To me the answer matters more for the broader climate change regulation debate than for California's drought.  Whether or not the drought is typical or exacerbated by human-induced climate change, the supply of freshwater is not meeting the demands of California's population and economy, and that is creating a socioeconomic drought that requires meaningful regulation.

To that end a number of measures have been adopted by the state to reduce water use.  Nathanael Johnson at Grist usefully debunks some common myths about these regulations so far, including claims that agriculture has not been forced to cut back (myth), farmers are wasting water (misleading), and water laws don't allow water rights to be bought and sold (also not true, though I can't say I've heard anyone make this claim).   

But Johnson peddles a myth of his own by lauding the virtue of bottom-up regulation without fully exploring the drawbacks.  California's new groundwater law tasks local water agencies with developing management plans by 2020, with the aim of withdrawing water sustainably by 2040.  There is a lot to like about that decentralized approach, as Johnson notes: 

The legislature could have imposed rules from above that would be in place now, but lawmakers wanted to allow the people to craft rules that were contextually appropriate. That seems wise to me...We need rules informed by local knowledge and crafted by local water users.

Decentralization promotes contextual planning, local ownership and participation, diversification of the broader water system, specialized expertise, and in some cases, institutions defined by water bodies, not political boundaries (Florida is a good example).  For these reasons and others decentralized water management is in vogue in the international water NGO community.  But too often the costs of decentralization are not fully explored.  I've written about these shortcomings in Haiti and Rwanda, but even in the United States there are trade-offs that appear in the California context as well.  To name a few:

Read More

Why countries need an international volcano response plan

/
Why countries need an international volcano response plan

Among the topics covered by the April 11th 2015 issue of the Economist: the US presidential election, the Iran nuclear deal, terrorism in Kenya and Malaysia, and economic projections for the European Union.  It might be surprising, then, that the lead-in is an article on volcanoes and climate whose introductory setting is Indonesia in 1815.  That was the year Mount Tambora erupted.  The most powerful volcanic eruption of the past 500 years , Tambora released ash over a million square kilometers, and killed 60,000-120,000 people.  But the global impact was much more subtle.  By releasing sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, particles reflected sunlight away from the earth, cooling and drying the planet:

The year after the eruption clothes froze to washing lines in the New England summer and glaciers surged down Alpine valleys at an alarming rate.  Countless thousands starved in China's Yunnan province and typhus spread across Europe.  Grain was in such short supply in Britain that the Corn Laws were suspended...And no one knew that the common cause of all these things was a ruined mountain in a far-off sea.

Volcanoes don't feature much in modern discourse about climate change, natural disasters, and societal resilience.  Perhaps they should.  While there is a direct risk to people and property from lava and ash, that risk is minimized by relatively sophisticated early warning systems.  The real danger may be the indirect impacts on the global environment.

Read More

The Law of Disaster and Displacement in Haiti (Part III)

/
The Law of Disaster and Displacement in Haiti (Part III)

The third in a three-part series on disaster and displacement in Haiti.  Read the rest of the series: Part I, Part II.

Five years since the earthquake, the number of people living in camps has dropped by over 90%.  Still, between 100,000 – 150,000 remain, and for those that returned to their homes, life remains difficult.  67% of households that were displaced by the earthquake are unable to meet their basic needs, compared to 43% of households that were not displaced.  Families that were displaced are more likely than non-displaced families to report that their living conditions have worsened, that they feel insecure, or that they have poor access to water, sanitation facilities, or healthcare.   Despite a reduction in the number of people living in camps, replacing what was lost during the earthquake and its aftermath remains a struggle. 

Of additional concern though is the prospect of another disaster, be it an earthquake or a hurricane.  The particular legal problems addressed above have received little attention, and what attention has been paid appears not to have made a significant change to realities on the ground. 

Read More

The Law of Disaster and Displacement in Haiti (Part II)

/
The Law of Disaster and Displacement in Haiti (Part II)

The second in a three-part series on disaster and displacement in Haiti.  Read the rest of the series: Part I, Part III.

Once 1.5-2 million Haitians lost their homes, displacement was exacerbated by complex property laws and land tenure administration.  Simply put, it is difficult to confidently know who owns what in Haiti.  Formal institutions purporting to administer property rights function poorly, giving rise to informal arrangements between landowner and occupant.  The informal system works well enough for Haitians, but was mistrusted by foreign aid agencies financing reconstruction.  The agencies sought durable solutions that provided tenants with security and a respectable standard of living, ignoring the fact that poor living conditions had been the norm before the earthquake. The disconnect forced many to continue living in camps far longer than necessary as agencies grappled with property law entanglements.  The camps themselves became the subject of land disputes as owners of land on which camps were established tried to evict camp occupants from their land.  Fearing that settlements would become permanent, landowners asserted their rights under national law to evict occupants and, when that proved unhelpful, by other demonstrations of power, including force and corruption.  The international community, meanwhile, leaned on international law to block evictions, including human rights law and international principles on internal displacement.  The government was unable to mediate as it had conflicting interests (some camps were on public lands), and through its numerous institutions did not speak with one voice.  Thus an archaic and complex land law and land administration system paralyzed the effort to return displaced communities to their homes.

On the other side of the island of Hispaniola, the Dominican Republic uses its own laws to frustrate Haitians displaced from the earthquake.  

Read More

The Law of Disaster and Displacement in Haiti (Part I)

/
The Law of Disaster and Displacement in Haiti (Part I)

This is the first in a three-part series about disaster and displacement in Haiti.  Read the rest of the series: Part II, Part III. 

Port-au-Prince is Haiti’s capital and most populous city, with a metropolitan population of nearly 2.5 million.  On January 12, 2010, a magnitude 7.0 Mw earthquake struck 25 kilometers southwest of the city.  An additional 52 aftershocks with a magnitude of at least 4.5 followed.  The island of Hispaniola – which Haiti shares with the Dominican Republic – is no stranger to extreme natural events like earthquakes and tropical cyclones, but the 2010 earthquake was unprecedented in its destructive impact.   Death toll estimates range from 100,000 - 300,000.   Critical infrastructure designed to respond to disasters (e.g., hospitals, roads, seaports, airports, communication systems) was destroyed.   Many of the city's other buildings - including private residences, government institutions, and business centers - were likewise completely or functionally destroyed.  In sum, Haiti’s largest city and the epicenter of government and economic activity was ground to a halt.

While recovering and respectfully disposing of the deceased proved trying, responding to the needs of the living became a challenge of epic proportions.  The United States Agency for International Development estimates that 1.5 million people were displaced into some 1,500 camps.  Many others forced to leave their homes sought refuge with family in other parts of the country.  And by almost all accounts, the response to displacement was inadequate.  A year after the earthquake 500,000 Haitians were still living in camps, and although the rough official number in 2014 was ‘only’ 100,000, the effect of displacement is persistent and hard to fully discern in a city where camps can be hard to distinguish from slums.  A 2014 survey found that 74% of families forced to leave their homes in 2010 still consider themselves displaced, even though they no longer live in displacement camps.   Meanwhile, life in the camps was ill-conceived: many had no electricity, clean water, sanitation facilities, or protection from the elements.  Sexual, domestic, and gang violence was common, and a cholera outbreak (likely introduced by foreign aid workers) exacerbated a fragile public health environment. 

The inadequacy of the response to displacement has many intertwined roots, the totality of which is still being uncovered.  One of the most distressing concerns for Haiti and the international community, however, was (and continues to be) the weak legal framework designed to mitigate and respond to extreme natural events. 

Read More

Indirect Climate Change Regulation: The Case for Freshwater and Ocean Agreements

/
Indirect Climate Change Regulation: The Case for Freshwater and Ocean Agreements

Re-posted from my 2014 guest blog post at the University of Pennsylvania's RegBlog

Climate change presents the international community with a monumental regulatory problem that transcends generations, sectors, and political boundaries. Yet comprehensive climate change legislation on the international and national level seems a long way off, as countries appear unwilling to alter the course of their economic development without reciprocal commitments from the rest of the international community. In the absence of such comprehensive legislation, legal mechanisms that indirectly regulate climate change have emerged as viable, albeit interim, options. Among these mechanisms, international freshwater and ocean agreements are unappreciated sources of indirect climate change regulation.

The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat, for example, aims to reverse the loss of wetlands through the adoption of “wise use” or sustainable use principles. The Ramsar Convention requires 168 contracting states to designate at least one area as a wetland of “international importance” in which the wise use of the wetland must be promoted in order to maintain its ecological character. With wetlands covering more than six percent of the Earth’s surface and playing a key role as sinks for carbon emissions, the convention’s ability to mobilize international support for wetlands conservation and wise utilization is a critical—and often neglected—component of the community’s mitigation and adaptation approach to climate change. To date 2,188 sites have been listed as internationally important wetlands, covering a total area of over 805,440 square miles.

Just as the Ramsar Convention represents an important international effort to protect wetlands, the 1994 United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) aims to foster international cooperation to combat desertification and mitigate the effects of drought. The UNCCD explicitly recognizes the contribution “that combating desertification can make to achieving the objectives of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change,” presumably because the challenges of combating desertification and mitigating the effects of drought are so intricately linked with climate change. Not only does climate change exacerbate desertification by making precipitation patterns more irregular, more direct forms of desertification—such as unsustainable agricultural practices and deforestation—eliminate another barrier ecosystem capable of absorbing atmospheric carbon dioxide. Thus, the UNCCD’s ability to mobilize support for combating desertification has a significant impact on climate change mitigation and adaptation, while the treaty’s unique integration with the UNFCCC provides a model for future international environmental agreements to fit their objectives into a climate change framework.

Treaties regulating the world’s oceans have even greater potential to indirectly regulate climate change.

Read More