Environment and Economic Development in Ethiopia
29 May, 2009 | By Getachew Belaineh
I am writing this article with full confidence and trust that concerned
officials and readers will take it as a constructive technical opinion that
supports making an effort to utilize Ethiopia's natural resources in a
sustainable and responsible manner. To begin, without hesitation I
commend the efforts to utilize the nation’s natural resources including
the rivers, minerals, and fertile soils to alleviate poverty and make the
country a better place to live. The country is desperately poor and its
natural resources are among the first targets for economic development.
Obviously, developmental activities have thrived in the country in the
past decade. However, it is feared that officials are only aimed at short-
term economic gains and are causing massive ecosystem extinctions.
This fear is the catalyst for writing this article. The article attempts to
accentuate the grave consequences of developments that are only aimed
at short-term economic gains and ignore sustainability.
The message aims at the broad spectrum of industrial and agricultural
developments and small and large developments; however, not to be
wearisome, few are singled out vis-à-vis water infrastructures, cement
factories, land leasing, and commercial flower farms and are bound to
hit upon two issues: sustainability and the contentious national benefit.
By no means is the intent to downplay these efforts, rather it is to call
attention to the seemingly overlooked development-induced irreversible
environmental consequences and misconstrued benefit. At this point, it
is worth mentioning the plea more than 1,500 of the world’s top
scientists made in 1993:
Industries ranging from small food processing plants to huge complex
cement factories have detrimental effects on the nation’s growth.
Agricultural developments not only offer food security, but can also be
lucrative and play a major role in hard currency earnings. However,
these developmental efforts will furnish meaningful national benefits
only when planned and implemented in a sustainable and responsible
manner. The government often sees developmental activities as having
the potential to meet traditional economic desiderata to enhance citizens’
short-term satisfaction with the administration. Long-term social and
environmental aspects should be given the same significance as
economic and financial factors. Oftentimes, the much-trumpeted
benefits may not necessarily be beneficial as they are made to sound in
the media, because they do not include the costs of protecting the
environment from development-induced environmental and social
impacts. The essence of sustainable development is a stable relationship
between developmental activities and the natural system, which does not
diminish biodiversity and the prospects for future generations.
Developments alone solve only half of the equation of economic growth.
The other half of the equation deals with the sustainability and protection
of induced ecosystem impacts. A true development ought to solve both
equations simultaneously, such that the needs of the present are met
without compromising the biodiversity and the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs. Ignoring sustainability is the same
as ignoring future generations. With that, said on the general, the
following section would scrutinize selected current developmental
activities.
Gilgel Gibe Dams: The development of multipurpose water
infrastructure in general is critical to effective economic growth. In the
past 10 years or so, the country has installed two major hydropower
dams: Tekeze dam in Tekeze River in the northern part of the country,
and Gilgel Gibe I in the tributary of Gibe River, Gilgel Gibe (Baby Gibe),
in the western part. The construction of the Gilgel Gibe II hydroelectric
plant and Gilgel Gibe III dam on Omo River are currently underway.
Gilgel Gibe II situated on the Gibe River mainstream, is an extension of
Gilgel Gibe I, and does not involve a dam. Gilgel Gibe III, the biggest
hydroelectric project in Ethiopia, is being constructed on the Omo River,
which is about 150 km downstream of the Gilgel Gibe II site, and when
completed will add 1,870 megawatts to the power grid. The Omo River
is an international (trans-boundary) river that begins at the confluence of
the Gibe and Gojeb rivers and discharges into Lake Turkana in Kenya.
All three Gilgel Gibes can be viewed as a single water infrastructure
because they impact the same basin. Some fear this series of hydro-
infrastructures (especially, Gilgel Gibe III) will impose a serious
negative impact on the downstream ecosystem including Lake Turkana.
It is a legitimate fear.
The Los Angeles Times published an article in its May 14, 2009, issue
about the environmental problems Gilgel Gibe III will impose on the
people living downstream. A California-based environmentalist group
has also asked the bank to stop funding the construction of the dam,
citing the threat the dam would impose on Lake Turkana in Kenya.
Without a doubt, Gilgel Gibe III will alter the natural Omo River flow
pattern. The alteration may range from brief no flow conditions in dry
seasons to unnaturally high flow when water is released from the
reservoir to run the turbines. This is indeed a serous but manageable
problem. Ethiopia may not have minimum flow criteria for any of its
rivers at present. Without getting into the complex relationships between
minimum flow level and the ecosystem, the simple approach to set
minimum flow level would be to identify the lowest flow in the Omo
River using historical flow records and allowing that rate during dry
seasons. The impact from unnaturally high flow can be reduced by
diverting the excess flow to irrigation fields or other water supply
systems. The upstream side of the dam also has its share of significant
impacts resulting from the inundation of the 34,000 square kilometer (34
million hectares) reservoir. In fact, unlike the downstream side, the
upstream effect is all seasons for the life of the dam, which is 70 or 80
years. An increase in malaria and schistosomiasis (aka bilharzia) is
expected to spread around the shore of the reservoir. The natural
ecological, historical, and maybe archeological resources will be
permanently inundated. Not to mention, the people who will be displaced
from the submerged area.
Having said that much about the consequences of Gilgel Gibe III, the
argument to stop the project by only the environmental concerns has no
merit. Despite the potentially negative impacts, the Gibe hydropower
dams can yield huge environmental benefits both locally and regionally.
The power produced hydroelectrically is much cleaner than coal burning
and will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The aforementioned
environmental consequences are preventable with careful operation
system and robust mitigation activities. According to the Africa
Development Bank (ADB), about 267 million Birr (US $27 million) is
budgeted for mitigation of the upstream and downstream ecological
impacts. However, it should be mentioned that there is no evidence that
the government’s implementation of mitigation works as mentioned in
the loan document. The trend is to put environmental issues on the front
burner until closing the loan and then later forget about it. The timely
implementation of ecological mitigation is often a fundamental part of
ensuring that a project is environmental friendly and delivered on time.
On the flip side, the economic feasibility of the Gilgel Gibe III project is
an open question that needs serious attention. The project construction
is underway since 2004 with an estimated total cost of about 21 billion
Birr (US $1.86 billion). According to an Italian company who analyzed
the project, the implemented has began without a comprehensive pre-
project option assessment and cost/benefit analysis. One of the elements
that determine the economic feasibility is the electric power sell
arrangement. As reported by the government, the target markets are
domestic consumers and export to neighboring countries. Regarding the
domestic market, based on the current indicators, the electric supply
from Gilgel Gibe III could be unaffordable for many domestic
consumers for the near future. With respect to export, the government
is currently negotiating power purchase agreements with Djibouti,
Sudan, and Kenya, although none have signed a commitment to date. In
fact, the recently heightened controversy surrounding the Gilgel Gibe III
project originates from Kenya because of the ecological effect on Lake
Turkana. On these grounds, it would be naïve for the Ethiopian
government to target Kenya as a potential market. The life of the dam is
the other major factor determining the economic feasibility of the
project. In order to utilize the dam to its maximum design life, the
reservoir must be protected from siltation. Siltation effectively reduces
the dam’s life as manifested in Koka hydroelectric dam in Ethiopia and
elsewhere in the world. Siltation problem can be minimized if prior to
the compeletion of the the contributing watershed is rigorously treated
to reduce sediment transport. Hydrologically, because of the frequent
drought occurrence in the country, the dam could be vulnerable to
drought or severe climate changes.
In sum, Gilgel Gibe III can be environmentally tolerable if implemented
with the necessary ecosystem protection schemes, but its economic
feasibility and sustainability is still wobbly.
Derba Cement Factory: The construction of a relatively large cement
factory known as Derba Cement factory is another developmental
activity currently in progress. This factory is located in the Sululta
region about 70 km north of Addis Ababa. When completed, along with
the others, the factory is expected to meet Ethiopian cement demand for
some time in the future. The overall benefit of this factory is luminously
reported in various local media outlets and by its officials, and there is
no need to echo it here. The underreported and unrecognized aspect of
the factory is its adverse social and environmental impacts. The factory
buildings, the quarry site, and the roads are stretched over a total area of
about188 hectares. The quarry and factory are situated relatively far
apart. The factory is located on a pristine beautiful green plateau about 8
km from Derba village near the town of Sululita. The quarry site is in
the Mugher Valley connected by a 7 km conveyor to the factory. One
would wonder why the factory is not situated within the vicinity of the
quarry site instead of in undisturbed natural landscape. It appears
maximizing the company’s profitability was the primary objective in the
selection of the factory’s location. The parent company, Midroc, is a
company that can only survive by making a profit or in the hopes of
making a profit in the future. So it is within its interest to locate the
factory in an optimum position to gain maximum profit. There is nothing
wrong with the company’s interests; the problem is the environmental
issues were not addressed.
The other concern with the Derba Cement factory is its huge appetite
for water, which is estimated to be 2,000 cubic meters (2 million liter)
per day. The factory is permitted to pump ground water to meet its
water requirement, and the environmental and social impact assessment
(ESIA) document shows pumping 2,000 cubic meters per day is much
less than the natural groundwater recharge rate in the area and will not
cause any undesirable impact on the region’s water resources (Africa
Development Bank). The bank document do not show what kind of data
and method of analysis was used to arrive at that conclusion. It is
unclear whether scenarios such as an extended dry period which is
fairly common in the region, and projected population and demand
growth are considered in the analysis. At any rate, from a resources
conservation perspective, the more sound approach could be for the
factory to build its own surface reservoir to store surface runoff and
use groundwater as a supplemental source. There is no record showing
environmental mitigation to offset any unavoidable impacts with
restoration or enhancement of other areas. Normally, mitigation actions
(if there are any) are required to occur before the company begins
construction.
The timely implementations of the environmental protection systems and
the mitigation plan will provide a win-win situation to promote both
economic benefit of the factory and environmental protection.
Cut Flower Business: The development of cut flower farms is on the
rise predominantly within the Great Rift Valley. Until the late 70s, flower
growing was merely a household activity in Ethiopia. Only after the mid-
80s was commercial expansion of flower growing with an emphasis on
overseas markets. In the 80s, there was only a single flower farm on
about 25 hectares of land near the town of Zeway about 130 km south
of Addis Ababa, and it was owned and operated by the government.
Determined to grab a slice of the lucrative cut flower market, it has been
about a decade since the government has started encouraging foreign
investors to cross the border. Spurred by five-year tax holidays, and
duty-free machinery import, flower farms now cover an area of about
1,500 hectares in the span of the past 10 years. About 90 local and
foreign enterprises are involved, but the majority of the land is owned by
foreigners. For example, a Dutch company alone is engaged on a 500-
hectare flower farm in the Zeway area. Although the net national
revenue is unknown, reportedly, cut flower export generates a gross
$160 million a year with an estimated annual growth rate of about 20
percent. The present global financial crises might have retarded the
export temporarily. Nonetheless, basic business concepts dictate that the
country’s revenue in this market is only a small fraction of the gross
income. The following section will explore the social and environmental
impacts.
Water is a scarce resource across most parts of Ethiopia. However,
despite the high level of consumptive of water, flower farms continue to
thrive without consideration of an efficient irrigation system. Studies
show about 90 percent of a flower is water; therefore, exporting
flowers is exporting fresh water. The consumptive use with the most
efficient irrigation system is about 40 cubic meters or 40,000 liters per
day per hectare. Simple math shows that the 1,500 hectares of farmland
consume about 60,000 cubic meters (60 million liters) per day. In fact,
less efficient farms, which are mostly the case in the absence of water
use regulations, can use three times as much. In Kenya, the water level
in Lake Naivasha is about 3 meters lower than its normal level due to the
commercial flower farms in the surrounding area. In Ethiopia where
drought is frequent, it will not be too long before the groundwater will
be depleted and those scenic and biologically diverse Great Rift Valley
lakes disappear. The Great Rift Valley ecosystem is breathtakingly
attractive and serves as a habitat for diverse wildlife including several
rare bird species. If there is anyone who is not a nature admirer before
coming to the Great Rift Valley, certainly he or she will be after visiting
the area. For instance, Lake Ziwaye is one of the freshwater lakes
known for its population of birds and hippopotamuses and supports a
fishing industry. This natural set up is at stake unless the water usage
and chemical application is robustly regulated. The disappearance and/or
poising of these freshwater lakes mean the extinction of birds, fish, and
hippos that are housed by the lakes. Regulating water usage not only
promotes an effective irrigation system that delivers necessary quantities
of water, but also reduces the transport of nonpoint pollution to the
lakes and groundwater. There is no legal framework guiding the use of
surface water or groundwater resources in the country. This is alarming
call to set one up.
Excessive toxic pesticides, inorganic fertilizers (nitrate and phosphate),
and preservative chemicals are another serious concern associated with
commercial scale flower farms. In fact, flower buyers’ demand for
unblemished and pest-free flowers encourages growers to use excessive
amounts of highly toxic chemicals. To meet this demand, flowers both
on the farm and in the packaging process are frequently and liberally
sprayed with a multitude of chemicals. In many developed countries,
operating a commercial flower farm is no longer profitable due to the
costly environmental protection criteria. This is partly the reason flower
growers choose to establish their farms in the Third World where there
is minimum or no environmental regulation, and of course, a cheap
workforce. Recently, the managing director of Sher Ethiopia, one of the
large-scale flower farms, said his farm follows European environmental
regulation standards because Ethiopia’s regulation is not robust enough
to protect the environment. The manager is correct about the nominal
regulatory system, and that is an embarrassment to the responsible
governmental agencies. However, it is hard to believe that the company
voluntarily imposed tighter environmental regulations on itself, incurring
additional costs out of its own free will to protect the environment.
bodies and vegetations harmful to human, wild, and aquatic life. Cattle
and wild animals eating the contaminated vegetation and drinking the
poisoned water transfer the chemicals into the food chain. Koka Lake is
on the verge of ecological collapse due to recent harmful algal bloom
resulting from the drainage of flower farms and other industries into the
watershed. The local people who have no choice but to drink the lake's
water each day are left to deal with a range of health problems ranging
from fatal chronic diarrhea to babies born with birth defects. Further
more, many of the flower farm workers suffer from health problems
linked to unprotected daily exposure to toxic pesticides. Even more
frightening is that some of the damage to the workforce’s health could
be irreparable.
The slave wage, nonexistant compensation plan for injuries at work, and
the long work hours compounded with the unprotected work condition
makes the work environment equivalent to a concentration camp. The
real tragedy is that the workers have no say regarding their rights
because they are not allowed to form a labor union. Ironically, there is a
Flower Exporters Association representing the investors that gives them
the power to use an illiterate, unprotected, and underpaid workforce.
The government has given due attention to the industry because of the
revenue it collects. No one seem to pay attention to the environmental
mismanagement, labor abuse and unfair land holding. As part of its
social responsibility recently, Sher Ethiopia, has constructed a Stadium
with half a million USD and granted to the community with 25,000 USD
donations (Africa News). The same news paper published that Minister
of Agriculture and Rural Development acknowledged Sher Ethiopia for
its outstanding social responsibility activities and pointed that it can be
taken as a model of good business practice by other business
companies. This is laughable. What good is a stadium do to a
community whose health is at risk, and whose labor right is redeculesly
violated, whose environment is ireversably damaged?
Leasing Land to Foreigners: The inherently low agricultural
productivity, together with the current shortage of foreign currency, led
the government to begin leasing huge chunk of fertile lands to foreign
countries for agricultural development. The leasing arrangement
essentially offered foreign investors not only fertile soil, also unlimited
access to scarce freshwater resources and a cheap labor force.
According to a report written jointly by two UN bodies, Food and
Agriculture Organization, and the International Institute for Environment
and Development, African countries are giving away vast tracts of
farmland to foreign countries and investors almost for free, with the
only benefits consisting of fuzzy promises of jobs and infrastructure.
Countries like Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, Libya, and Egypt who are short of
fertile land and freshwater resources are buying or leasing land from
countries all over the world. Ethiopia is one of the targets. According to
the government officials, the food produced on the leased lands will be
available to domestic markets as well as for export. That is a publicity
stunt because domestic consumers cannot possibly compete with the
prices foreign consumers would pay. Many are wary; not only the food
but the profits from this farming would be siphoned off to consumers
and investors in other countries.
It is true that revenues from taxes, and tariffs may give the government
limited short-term relief from the hard currency shortage. However, this
marginal short-term monetary benefit compounded with the long-term
residual adverse impact on the community and the ecosystem makes the
leasing of land to foreigners an unwise exploitation of natural resources.
Arguably, the government used the inherently low agricultural
productivity in the country as an excuse for the strikingly short and
simple land leasing contract compared to the economic reality of the
transaction. However, leasing land to foreigners cannot be the way to
improve productivity (yield per hectare) and thereby the country’s food
security. The way to improve inherently low agricultural productivity is
by helping local farmers improve their primitive farming practices,
making available the necessary yield-boosting inputs including fertilizers
and improved seeds, and reforming the land ownership policy to
liberalize the agricultural sector to promote private sector development.
Leasing fertile land to foreigners is without a doubt more beneficial to
leaseholders than the country.
Suggested General Solutions: All the above-mentioned environmental
and social impacts are preventable or at least can be substantially
minimized with a practical and effective regulatory system. Here are
some suggestions: (1) It should be mandatory for each industry and
construction project in the country to pass through an environmental
permitting processes before establishing the firm or implementing the
construction. In the permit application, the permitting agency, based on
pre-established site-specific specifications, must evaluate the company’s
ability to meet the nation’s environmental protection criteria. (2) In
addition to the site-specific environmental regulatory criteria, the
permitting process must also require chemical intensive farms including
flower farm industries to be fair trade certified. Fair trade certification
provides an independent verification that the workers on the farms have
decent wages and working conditions in line with the core International
Labor Organization (ILO) Conventions and farms are environmentally
friendly. The certification includes the right to join a trade union, the
right to negotiate collectively with the employer on terms and conditions
of employment, freedom from discrimination, and a safe and healthy
working environment. (3) There must be an agency in charge of
reinforcing environmental regulation by monitoring to ensure effluents
from farms or industries meet the quality standard.
In the bigger picture, environmental education should be a part of the
school curriculum at every grade because student knowledge of basic
environmental concepts establishes a foundation for their future
understandings and actions as citizens. Universities should consider
offering high level Environmental Sciences and Environmental
Engineering courses leading to professionals in the respective fields.
Specially, science, agricultural and engineering colleges/faculties ought
to be fully engaged in producing scientists and professionals in
Environmental Sciences/Engineering fields. Addis Ababa University has
recently opened an Institute of Environment, Water and Developments
(IEWD) under the College of Development Studies. That is a good start.
The country has great growth potential, but this potential is not realized
due to multiple factors. The leading factor is the ineffectiveness of the
responsible agencies. This article would be incomplete without a few
words about the agencies supposedly responsible for agricultural
developments and environmental protection. These agencies are the long-
standing Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MOARD),
Institute of Agricultural Research (IAR), and the Environment
Protection Authority (EPA). The latter is a relatively young agency
established approximately in 1992. IAR was established in 1966 with
mandates to formulate the national agricultural research policy; carry out
researches in various agroecological zones of the country. According to
publications, IAR’s golden period was approximately between the 70s
and early 80s when considerable research results have been released
improving crop yield and stress resistance. The agency appears to be in
a frozen mode since then. MOARD is one of the oldest, the largest and
well-staffed ministries in the country. MOARD was established with
mandate to sustainably improve agricultural and rural developments in
the country by providing the necessary technical, infrastructural and
institutional support, and ensure safe agricultural operations having due
regards to nature diversity and protection of the environment. Yet
farming is still primitive, agricultural productivity continues to decline,
and most farmers are producing below subsistence level, and
environment is endangered by unregulated commercial farms. In sum,
primarily due to bureaucratic entanglements and outdated administrative
set ups MOARD, and IAR to some degree have become blind to the real
issues the country is facing vis-à-vis the under development of
agriculture. According to the United Nations Development Program,
about 74 million hectares of land are arable with only 10 percent
presently cultivated. The under-utilization of the vast areas of fertile land
established an excuse for the government to move towards attracting
and encouraging foreign companies to lease the land. Leasing land to
foreign countries is not necessarily the best solution, as shown above,
but clearly indicates that MOARD and IAR are not living up to their
duties and responsibilities to help farmers utilize the land and become
productive. EPA is a relatively new agency and appears to be
overwhelmed by the thriving anthropogenic environmental issues.
Outsourcing some of the monitoring and regulatory tasks may help EPA
to tackle many of the issues.
As part of the effort to improve the agricultural productivity, MOARD
and IAR need radical institutional transformations to cure them from
their chronic bureaucratic entanglements and outdated administrative
styles.
Concluding Remark: The effort to make the most of natural resources
to improve living conditions in the country is admirable. However, it is
poignant not to do it sustainably and responsibly. We are not the final
generation of the country. There are future generations to consider.
They too need these resources for their existence. Contrary to that
animal, let the grass continue to grow even after we expire.
The author can be reached at gbelaineh@yahoo.com
29 May, 2009 | By Getachew Belaineh
I am writing this article with full confidence and trust that concerned
officials and readers will take it as a constructive technical opinion that
supports making an effort to utilize Ethiopia's natural resources in a
sustainable and responsible manner. To begin, without hesitation I
commend the efforts to utilize the nation’s natural resources including
the rivers, minerals, and fertile soils to alleviate poverty and make the
country a better place to live. The country is desperately poor and its
natural resources are among the first targets for economic development.
Obviously, developmental activities have thrived in the country in the
past decade. However, it is feared that officials are only aimed at short-
term economic gains and are causing massive ecosystem extinctions.
This fear is the catalyst for writing this article. The article attempts to
accentuate the grave consequences of developments that are only aimed
at short-term economic gains and ignore sustainability.
The message aims at the broad spectrum of industrial and agricultural
developments and small and large developments; however, not to be
wearisome, few are singled out vis-à-vis water infrastructures, cement
factories, land leasing, and commercial flower farms and are bound to
hit upon two issues: sustainability and the contentious national benefit.
By no means is the intent to downplay these efforts, rather it is to call
attention to the seemingly overlooked development-induced irreversible
environmental consequences and misconstrued benefit. At this point, it
is worth mentioning the plea more than 1,500 of the world’s top
scientists made in 1993:
- "We must recognize the earth’
s limited capacity to provide
for us. We must recognize its
fragility. We must no longer
allow it to be ravaged. This
ethic must motivate a great
movement, convincing
reluctant leaders and reluctant
governments and reluctant
peoples themselves to effect
the needed changes.”
Industries ranging from small food processing plants to huge complex
cement factories have detrimental effects on the nation’s growth.
Agricultural developments not only offer food security, but can also be
lucrative and play a major role in hard currency earnings. However,
these developmental efforts will furnish meaningful national benefits
only when planned and implemented in a sustainable and responsible
manner. The government often sees developmental activities as having
the potential to meet traditional economic desiderata to enhance citizens’
short-term satisfaction with the administration. Long-term social and
environmental aspects should be given the same significance as
economic and financial factors. Oftentimes, the much-trumpeted
benefits may not necessarily be beneficial as they are made to sound in
the media, because they do not include the costs of protecting the
environment from development-induced environmental and social
impacts. The essence of sustainable development is a stable relationship
between developmental activities and the natural system, which does not
diminish biodiversity and the prospects for future generations.
Developments alone solve only half of the equation of economic growth.
The other half of the equation deals with the sustainability and protection
of induced ecosystem impacts. A true development ought to solve both
equations simultaneously, such that the needs of the present are met
without compromising the biodiversity and the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs. Ignoring sustainability is the same
as ignoring future generations. With that, said on the general, the
following section would scrutinize selected current developmental
activities.
Gilgel Gibe Dams: The development of multipurpose water
infrastructure in general is critical to effective economic growth. In the
past 10 years or so, the country has installed two major hydropower
dams: Tekeze dam in Tekeze River in the northern part of the country,
and Gilgel Gibe I in the tributary of Gibe River, Gilgel Gibe (Baby Gibe),
in the western part. The construction of the Gilgel Gibe II hydroelectric
plant and Gilgel Gibe III dam on Omo River are currently underway.
Gilgel Gibe II situated on the Gibe River mainstream, is an extension of
Gilgel Gibe I, and does not involve a dam. Gilgel Gibe III, the biggest
hydroelectric project in Ethiopia, is being constructed on the Omo River,
which is about 150 km downstream of the Gilgel Gibe II site, and when
completed will add 1,870 megawatts to the power grid. The Omo River
is an international (trans-boundary) river that begins at the confluence of
the Gibe and Gojeb rivers and discharges into Lake Turkana in Kenya.
All three Gilgel Gibes can be viewed as a single water infrastructure
because they impact the same basin. Some fear this series of hydro-
infrastructures (especially, Gilgel Gibe III) will impose a serious
negative impact on the downstream ecosystem including Lake Turkana.
It is a legitimate fear.
The Los Angeles Times published an article in its May 14, 2009, issue
about the environmental problems Gilgel Gibe III will impose on the
people living downstream. A California-based environmentalist group
has also asked the bank to stop funding the construction of the dam,
citing the threat the dam would impose on Lake Turkana in Kenya.
Without a doubt, Gilgel Gibe III will alter the natural Omo River flow
pattern. The alteration may range from brief no flow conditions in dry
seasons to unnaturally high flow when water is released from the
reservoir to run the turbines. This is indeed a serous but manageable
problem. Ethiopia may not have minimum flow criteria for any of its
rivers at present. Without getting into the complex relationships between
minimum flow level and the ecosystem, the simple approach to set
minimum flow level would be to identify the lowest flow in the Omo
River using historical flow records and allowing that rate during dry
seasons. The impact from unnaturally high flow can be reduced by
diverting the excess flow to irrigation fields or other water supply
systems. The upstream side of the dam also has its share of significant
impacts resulting from the inundation of the 34,000 square kilometer (34
million hectares) reservoir. In fact, unlike the downstream side, the
upstream effect is all seasons for the life of the dam, which is 70 or 80
years. An increase in malaria and schistosomiasis (aka bilharzia) is
expected to spread around the shore of the reservoir. The natural
ecological, historical, and maybe archeological resources will be
permanently inundated. Not to mention, the people who will be displaced
from the submerged area.
Having said that much about the consequences of Gilgel Gibe III, the
argument to stop the project by only the environmental concerns has no
merit. Despite the potentially negative impacts, the Gibe hydropower
dams can yield huge environmental benefits both locally and regionally.
The power produced hydroelectrically is much cleaner than coal burning
and will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The aforementioned
environmental consequences are preventable with careful operation
system and robust mitigation activities. According to the Africa
Development Bank (ADB), about 267 million Birr (US $27 million) is
budgeted for mitigation of the upstream and downstream ecological
impacts. However, it should be mentioned that there is no evidence that
the government’s implementation of mitigation works as mentioned in
the loan document. The trend is to put environmental issues on the front
burner until closing the loan and then later forget about it. The timely
implementation of ecological mitigation is often a fundamental part of
ensuring that a project is environmental friendly and delivered on time.
On the flip side, the economic feasibility of the Gilgel Gibe III project is
an open question that needs serious attention. The project construction
is underway since 2004 with an estimated total cost of about 21 billion
Birr (US $1.86 billion). According to an Italian company who analyzed
the project, the implemented has began without a comprehensive pre-
project option assessment and cost/benefit analysis. One of the elements
that determine the economic feasibility is the electric power sell
arrangement. As reported by the government, the target markets are
domestic consumers and export to neighboring countries. Regarding the
domestic market, based on the current indicators, the electric supply
from Gilgel Gibe III could be unaffordable for many domestic
consumers for the near future. With respect to export, the government
is currently negotiating power purchase agreements with Djibouti,
Sudan, and Kenya, although none have signed a commitment to date. In
fact, the recently heightened controversy surrounding the Gilgel Gibe III
project originates from Kenya because of the ecological effect on Lake
Turkana. On these grounds, it would be naïve for the Ethiopian
government to target Kenya as a potential market. The life of the dam is
the other major factor determining the economic feasibility of the
project. In order to utilize the dam to its maximum design life, the
reservoir must be protected from siltation. Siltation effectively reduces
the dam’s life as manifested in Koka hydroelectric dam in Ethiopia and
elsewhere in the world. Siltation problem can be minimized if prior to
the compeletion of the the contributing watershed is rigorously treated
to reduce sediment transport. Hydrologically, because of the frequent
drought occurrence in the country, the dam could be vulnerable to
drought or severe climate changes.
In sum, Gilgel Gibe III can be environmentally tolerable if implemented
with the necessary ecosystem protection schemes, but its economic
feasibility and sustainability is still wobbly.
Derba Cement Factory: The construction of a relatively large cement
factory known as Derba Cement factory is another developmental
activity currently in progress. This factory is located in the Sululta
region about 70 km north of Addis Ababa. When completed, along with
the others, the factory is expected to meet Ethiopian cement demand for
some time in the future. The overall benefit of this factory is luminously
reported in various local media outlets and by its officials, and there is
no need to echo it here. The underreported and unrecognized aspect of
the factory is its adverse social and environmental impacts. The factory
buildings, the quarry site, and the roads are stretched over a total area of
about188 hectares. The quarry and factory are situated relatively far
apart. The factory is located on a pristine beautiful green plateau about 8
km from Derba village near the town of Sululita. The quarry site is in
the Mugher Valley connected by a 7 km conveyor to the factory. One
would wonder why the factory is not situated within the vicinity of the
quarry site instead of in undisturbed natural landscape. It appears
maximizing the company’s profitability was the primary objective in the
selection of the factory’s location. The parent company, Midroc, is a
company that can only survive by making a profit or in the hopes of
making a profit in the future. So it is within its interest to locate the
factory in an optimum position to gain maximum profit. There is nothing
wrong with the company’s interests; the problem is the environmental
issues were not addressed.
The other concern with the Derba Cement factory is its huge appetite
for water, which is estimated to be 2,000 cubic meters (2 million liter)
per day. The factory is permitted to pump ground water to meet its
water requirement, and the environmental and social impact assessment
(ESIA) document shows pumping 2,000 cubic meters per day is much
less than the natural groundwater recharge rate in the area and will not
cause any undesirable impact on the region’s water resources (Africa
Development Bank). The bank document do not show what kind of data
and method of analysis was used to arrive at that conclusion. It is
unclear whether scenarios such as an extended dry period which is
fairly common in the region, and projected population and demand
growth are considered in the analysis. At any rate, from a resources
conservation perspective, the more sound approach could be for the
factory to build its own surface reservoir to store surface runoff and
use groundwater as a supplemental source. There is no record showing
environmental mitigation to offset any unavoidable impacts with
restoration or enhancement of other areas. Normally, mitigation actions
(if there are any) are required to occur before the company begins
construction.
The timely implementations of the environmental protection systems and
the mitigation plan will provide a win-win situation to promote both
economic benefit of the factory and environmental protection.
Cut Flower Business: The development of cut flower farms is on the
rise predominantly within the Great Rift Valley. Until the late 70s, flower
growing was merely a household activity in Ethiopia. Only after the mid-
80s was commercial expansion of flower growing with an emphasis on
overseas markets. In the 80s, there was only a single flower farm on
about 25 hectares of land near the town of Zeway about 130 km south
of Addis Ababa, and it was owned and operated by the government.
Determined to grab a slice of the lucrative cut flower market, it has been
about a decade since the government has started encouraging foreign
investors to cross the border. Spurred by five-year tax holidays, and
duty-free machinery import, flower farms now cover an area of about
1,500 hectares in the span of the past 10 years. About 90 local and
foreign enterprises are involved, but the majority of the land is owned by
foreigners. For example, a Dutch company alone is engaged on a 500-
hectare flower farm in the Zeway area. Although the net national
revenue is unknown, reportedly, cut flower export generates a gross
$160 million a year with an estimated annual growth rate of about 20
percent. The present global financial crises might have retarded the
export temporarily. Nonetheless, basic business concepts dictate that the
country’s revenue in this market is only a small fraction of the gross
income. The following section will explore the social and environmental
impacts.
Water is a scarce resource across most parts of Ethiopia. However,
despite the high level of consumptive of water, flower farms continue to
thrive without consideration of an efficient irrigation system. Studies
show about 90 percent of a flower is water; therefore, exporting
flowers is exporting fresh water. The consumptive use with the most
efficient irrigation system is about 40 cubic meters or 40,000 liters per
day per hectare. Simple math shows that the 1,500 hectares of farmland
consume about 60,000 cubic meters (60 million liters) per day. In fact,
less efficient farms, which are mostly the case in the absence of water
use regulations, can use three times as much. In Kenya, the water level
in Lake Naivasha is about 3 meters lower than its normal level due to the
commercial flower farms in the surrounding area. In Ethiopia where
drought is frequent, it will not be too long before the groundwater will
be depleted and those scenic and biologically diverse Great Rift Valley
lakes disappear. The Great Rift Valley ecosystem is breathtakingly
attractive and serves as a habitat for diverse wildlife including several
rare bird species. If there is anyone who is not a nature admirer before
coming to the Great Rift Valley, certainly he or she will be after visiting
the area. For instance, Lake Ziwaye is one of the freshwater lakes
known for its population of birds and hippopotamuses and supports a
fishing industry. This natural set up is at stake unless the water usage
and chemical application is robustly regulated. The disappearance and/or
poising of these freshwater lakes mean the extinction of birds, fish, and
hippos that are housed by the lakes. Regulating water usage not only
promotes an effective irrigation system that delivers necessary quantities
of water, but also reduces the transport of nonpoint pollution to the
lakes and groundwater. There is no legal framework guiding the use of
surface water or groundwater resources in the country. This is alarming
call to set one up.
Excessive toxic pesticides, inorganic fertilizers (nitrate and phosphate),
and preservative chemicals are another serious concern associated with
commercial scale flower farms. In fact, flower buyers’ demand for
unblemished and pest-free flowers encourages growers to use excessive
amounts of highly toxic chemicals. To meet this demand, flowers both
on the farm and in the packaging process are frequently and liberally
sprayed with a multitude of chemicals. In many developed countries,
operating a commercial flower farm is no longer profitable due to the
costly environmental protection criteria. This is partly the reason flower
growers choose to establish their farms in the Third World where there
is minimum or no environmental regulation, and of course, a cheap
workforce. Recently, the managing director of Sher Ethiopia, one of the
large-scale flower farms, said his farm follows European environmental
regulation standards because Ethiopia’s regulation is not robust enough
to protect the environment. The manager is correct about the nominal
regulatory system, and that is an embarrassment to the responsible
governmental agencies. However, it is hard to believe that the company
voluntarily imposed tighter environmental regulations on itself, incurring
additional costs out of its own free will to protect the environment.
- When pesticides and
fertilizers are applied
excessively or
improperly, the excess
is washed off from the
farms to downstream
rivers, streams, and
lakes, causing an array
of problems including
poisoning, increased
algae blooms,
bodies and vegetations harmful to human, wild, and aquatic life. Cattle
and wild animals eating the contaminated vegetation and drinking the
poisoned water transfer the chemicals into the food chain. Koka Lake is
on the verge of ecological collapse due to recent harmful algal bloom
resulting from the drainage of flower farms and other industries into the
watershed. The local people who have no choice but to drink the lake's
water each day are left to deal with a range of health problems ranging
from fatal chronic diarrhea to babies born with birth defects. Further
more, many of the flower farm workers suffer from health problems
linked to unprotected daily exposure to toxic pesticides. Even more
frightening is that some of the damage to the workforce’s health could
be irreparable.
The slave wage, nonexistant compensation plan for injuries at work, and
the long work hours compounded with the unprotected work condition
makes the work environment equivalent to a concentration camp. The
real tragedy is that the workers have no say regarding their rights
because they are not allowed to form a labor union. Ironically, there is a
Flower Exporters Association representing the investors that gives them
the power to use an illiterate, unprotected, and underpaid workforce.
The government has given due attention to the industry because of the
revenue it collects. No one seem to pay attention to the environmental
mismanagement, labor abuse and unfair land holding. As part of its
social responsibility recently, Sher Ethiopia, has constructed a Stadium
with half a million USD and granted to the community with 25,000 USD
donations (Africa News). The same news paper published that Minister
of Agriculture and Rural Development acknowledged Sher Ethiopia for
its outstanding social responsibility activities and pointed that it can be
taken as a model of good business practice by other business
companies. This is laughable. What good is a stadium do to a
community whose health is at risk, and whose labor right is redeculesly
violated, whose environment is ireversably damaged?
Leasing Land to Foreigners: The inherently low agricultural
productivity, together with the current shortage of foreign currency, led
the government to begin leasing huge chunk of fertile lands to foreign
countries for agricultural development. The leasing arrangement
essentially offered foreign investors not only fertile soil, also unlimited
access to scarce freshwater resources and a cheap labor force.
According to a report written jointly by two UN bodies, Food and
Agriculture Organization, and the International Institute for Environment
and Development, African countries are giving away vast tracts of
farmland to foreign countries and investors almost for free, with the
only benefits consisting of fuzzy promises of jobs and infrastructure.
Countries like Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, Libya, and Egypt who are short of
fertile land and freshwater resources are buying or leasing land from
countries all over the world. Ethiopia is one of the targets. According to
the government officials, the food produced on the leased lands will be
available to domestic markets as well as for export. That is a publicity
stunt because domestic consumers cannot possibly compete with the
prices foreign consumers would pay. Many are wary; not only the food
but the profits from this farming would be siphoned off to consumers
and investors in other countries.
It is true that revenues from taxes, and tariffs may give the government
limited short-term relief from the hard currency shortage. However, this
marginal short-term monetary benefit compounded with the long-term
residual adverse impact on the community and the ecosystem makes the
leasing of land to foreigners an unwise exploitation of natural resources.
Arguably, the government used the inherently low agricultural
productivity in the country as an excuse for the strikingly short and
simple land leasing contract compared to the economic reality of the
transaction. However, leasing land to foreigners cannot be the way to
improve productivity (yield per hectare) and thereby the country’s food
security. The way to improve inherently low agricultural productivity is
by helping local farmers improve their primitive farming practices,
making available the necessary yield-boosting inputs including fertilizers
and improved seeds, and reforming the land ownership policy to
liberalize the agricultural sector to promote private sector development.
Leasing fertile land to foreigners is without a doubt more beneficial to
leaseholders than the country.
Suggested General Solutions: All the above-mentioned environmental
and social impacts are preventable or at least can be substantially
minimized with a practical and effective regulatory system. Here are
some suggestions: (1) It should be mandatory for each industry and
construction project in the country to pass through an environmental
permitting processes before establishing the firm or implementing the
construction. In the permit application, the permitting agency, based on
pre-established site-specific specifications, must evaluate the company’s
ability to meet the nation’s environmental protection criteria. (2) In
addition to the site-specific environmental regulatory criteria, the
permitting process must also require chemical intensive farms including
flower farm industries to be fair trade certified. Fair trade certification
provides an independent verification that the workers on the farms have
decent wages and working conditions in line with the core International
Labor Organization (ILO) Conventions and farms are environmentally
friendly. The certification includes the right to join a trade union, the
right to negotiate collectively with the employer on terms and conditions
of employment, freedom from discrimination, and a safe and healthy
working environment. (3) There must be an agency in charge of
reinforcing environmental regulation by monitoring to ensure effluents
from farms or industries meet the quality standard.
In the bigger picture, environmental education should be a part of the
school curriculum at every grade because student knowledge of basic
environmental concepts establishes a foundation for their future
understandings and actions as citizens. Universities should consider
offering high level Environmental Sciences and Environmental
Engineering courses leading to professionals in the respective fields.
Specially, science, agricultural and engineering colleges/faculties ought
to be fully engaged in producing scientists and professionals in
Environmental Sciences/Engineering fields. Addis Ababa University has
recently opened an Institute of Environment, Water and Developments
(IEWD) under the College of Development Studies. That is a good start.
The country has great growth potential, but this potential is not realized
due to multiple factors. The leading factor is the ineffectiveness of the
responsible agencies. This article would be incomplete without a few
words about the agencies supposedly responsible for agricultural
developments and environmental protection. These agencies are the long-
standing Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MOARD),
Institute of Agricultural Research (IAR), and the Environment
Protection Authority (EPA). The latter is a relatively young agency
established approximately in 1992. IAR was established in 1966 with
mandates to formulate the national agricultural research policy; carry out
researches in various agroecological zones of the country. According to
publications, IAR’s golden period was approximately between the 70s
and early 80s when considerable research results have been released
improving crop yield and stress resistance. The agency appears to be in
a frozen mode since then. MOARD is one of the oldest, the largest and
well-staffed ministries in the country. MOARD was established with
mandate to sustainably improve agricultural and rural developments in
the country by providing the necessary technical, infrastructural and
institutional support, and ensure safe agricultural operations having due
regards to nature diversity and protection of the environment. Yet
farming is still primitive, agricultural productivity continues to decline,
and most farmers are producing below subsistence level, and
environment is endangered by unregulated commercial farms. In sum,
primarily due to bureaucratic entanglements and outdated administrative
set ups MOARD, and IAR to some degree have become blind to the real
issues the country is facing vis-à-vis the under development of
agriculture. According to the United Nations Development Program,
about 74 million hectares of land are arable with only 10 percent
presently cultivated. The under-utilization of the vast areas of fertile land
established an excuse for the government to move towards attracting
and encouraging foreign companies to lease the land. Leasing land to
foreign countries is not necessarily the best solution, as shown above,
but clearly indicates that MOARD and IAR are not living up to their
duties and responsibilities to help farmers utilize the land and become
productive. EPA is a relatively new agency and appears to be
overwhelmed by the thriving anthropogenic environmental issues.
Outsourcing some of the monitoring and regulatory tasks may help EPA
to tackle many of the issues.
As part of the effort to improve the agricultural productivity, MOARD
and IAR need radical institutional transformations to cure them from
their chronic bureaucratic entanglements and outdated administrative
styles.
Concluding Remark: The effort to make the most of natural resources
to improve living conditions in the country is admirable. However, it is
poignant not to do it sustainably and responsibly. We are not the final
generation of the country. There are future generations to consider.
They too need these resources for their existence. Contrary to that
animal, let the grass continue to grow even after we expire.
The author can be reached at gbelaineh@yahoo.com
| All rights reserved. |
| Ethio Quest News Together We Can Make It! |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| Ethio Quest News: For latest Ethiopian News, views, Reviews and More |
| rarest wolf Nov.10 ( BBC ) - Scientists in the remote Bale mountains of southern Ethiopia are in a race against time to save the world's rarest wolf. More Vanishing African wildlife threatens livelihoods: Scientists |
| - Akababi - Ethiopia Environment News - Environment of Ethiopia - Ethiopian Environmental Protection Authority - Environmental issues in Ethiopia - Geography & Environment |
| Environmental Association "...Ethiopian environmental journalists working with private and government media outlets have got together to form an association, an official close to the newly formed association told The Daily Monitor on Monday." More |
