Discussion with Jackson Ewing:
Why So Hard To Reach Expected in Environmental Protection
Frank Mar. 24, 2016 in Waterloo, on. Ca
This is a group of reprinted articles of Dr. Jackson
Ewing, Director of Asian Sustainability at the Asia Society Policy
Institute (ASPI).
In viewing that Dr. Jackson Ewing
has been working on the Environmental Cooperation, Climate Change Policy and Food
Security for many years with the major of international relations and political
science, it is worth to cost some time to show my concerns about related issue.
The environmental and climate problems that are negatively
impacting human existence are complex and diverse, but the most important one may
be the greenhouse effect, it caused Sea-level rise and the El Nino phenomenon
with bad weather – floods or droughts. Now, the recognized cause for greenhouse
effect is the excessive emissions of CO2.
Over the years, through the efforts of rational experts
with their motivated politicians, on this issue, we have made some progress.
However, that is far from the need to meet human survival, the radical
resolution for controlling the emissions of CO2 is to update the life style of
human beings, especially, the well control of the blindly production for the profit
purpose under Invisible
hand, which is driven by human animal nature of selfish and greed.
On this global, any social problem is the problem of
politics. Since that human society is as that of a train in running on the
track. Unexpected social problem is as that of the train derailment,
the root cause is the poor track. And the track for human society is the
policies that legislated by government, and the government is the major means
of politics to influence on human society.
In writing ……
Expert Commentary: Supreme Court Puts U.S. Climate Promises on Shaky Ground
http://asiasociety.org/expert-commentary-supreme-court-puts-us-climate-promises-shaky-ground
On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to halt enforcement of the administration's plan to address carbon emissions until it issues a ruling on the case.
Dr. Jackson Ewing, Director of Asian Sustainability at the Asia Society Policy Institute (ASPI), weighs in on what the decision may mean for the Paris Climate Accord and the promises the Obama administration made to China, India and other international partners:
The U.S. Supreme Court’s temporary halting of the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan (CPP) has wide-ranging implications. The CPP is the main component of the Obama administration's energy reform agenda, and forms the foundation of U.S. commitments to address climate change. The Court ruling halts the enactment of the CPP until legal challenges have been decided; a process likely to extend through the remainder of Obama’s presidency and possibly beyond. Domestically, this uncertainty undermines the regulatory stability long called for by energy investors, and impedes U.S. efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Further afield, it erodes the basis of upon which the U.S. made international commitments.
The progressive stance of the U.S. and the burgeoning partnership that it formed with China emboldened the United Nations climate summit in Paris late last year. Longtime climate adversaries, these two countries agreed to move towards cleaner energy futures in tandem and reached bilateral agreements on how to do so. The Obama administration likewise lobbied the Modi government to get on board with the Paris Agreement in the face of stiff opposition in India. These U.S. efforts were legitimized in part by the CPP. Climate leaders in Beijing, Delhi and other capitals which followed suit are left questioning whether the U.S. will live up to its pledges.
The difficulty of meshing international commitments with domestic constrictions has always muddied American climate policy. With legislative options at home exhausted or dead on arrival, the Obama administration opted to regulate its way to energy sector reform. It based promises to its international partners on confidence that these regulations would take shape, and hasten the US transition to a post-fossil fuel based economy. These promises appear shakier in the wake of recent Supreme Court action.
For interview requests, contact pr@asiasociety.org.
A New Series
Southeast Asia’s Haze Problem:
Why So Hard To Resolve?
By Jackson Ewing
https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/CO15206.pdf
Synopsis
Haze from Indonesian fires has again blanketed Singapore and Malaysia. Prevention strategies are
improving, but will likely take years to become truly effective.
Commentary
SMOKE FROM Indonesia has again brought large parts of Malaysia and Singapore to a halt. By the
morning of 24 September 2015 the Pollution Standards Index (PSI) had crossed into the ‘Very
Unhealthy’ range on its way to a ‘Hazardous’ rating, and by Friday the 24-hour PSI rating hovered
between 264-321; the highest levels in 2015. Conditions have fluctuated since, but the haze
continues to shake both countries and impact their economic life.
The effects of this type of haze are increasingly familiar. Schools were closed, the most vulnerable
became sick, health care services were stressed, and businesses that remained open saw commerce
decline. The financial costs will prove significant when the numbers are in. The 1997 episode – which
until recent years set the benchmark for haze pollution – likely cost Singapore upwards of SGD250
million in health expenditures, tourism reductions and lost productivity. The episode in June and July
of 2013 was far worse, with financial impacts that are still being assessed. Beyond the dollars and
cents, the haze impacts the quality of life for Singaporeans and the island’s visitors in ways that only
the experienced can appreciate.
So why is the haze problem so hard to solve?
Haze prevention efforts
After decades of regional, national, academic and civil society attention, the problem is as intractable
as ever. Recent efforts to combat haze have been far from cursory. The source country Indonesia has
enacted logging moratoria, combined its environmental and forestry ministries, and ratified – albeit
with great delay – the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze in September 2014. It has
improved its land concession maps, expanded programmes on community-based forest manageme and fire prevention, levied a fine of over USD25 million on an offending palm oil producer, and
recently arrested executives of companies allegedly behind the current fires.
Singapore has commissioned studies on haze reduction, pursued tangible cooperation with nearby
Indonesian provinces, and passed legislation holding offending companies culpable. Large private
sector players have recognised the reputational risks they face from the haze, and dedicated greater
resources towards eliminating haze-causing activities from their supply chains. Research institutes
have improved monitoring and assessment, while civil society organisations have helped build
capacities on the ground.
Still, the problem pervades the dry months and defies solutions. The primary reasons are three-fold.
Countervailing forces
Expanding palm oil and paper sectors: First, the forces causing the haze are outpacing efforts to
mitigate it. While Indonesia has taken recent steps to combat the fires causing the haze, it has
simultaneously advanced its palm oil and pulp and paper sectors as key engines of the wider
economy. After surpassing Malaysia as the world’s leading producer of palm oil in 2006, Indonesia
announced plans to double production and brought millions of new hectares under cultivation.
These plantations now cover an area more than twice the size of Singapore and Belgium. Meanwhile
demand for paper continues to rise in emerging Asian economies, particularly China, and Indonesian
plantations reflect the country’s place as a key supplier. Indonesia’s pulp and paper industry may
expand by 20% between 2014 and 2016, and projects strong longer-term growth.
The boom in these sectors has changed their structures and characteristics. Expansion has been
defined largely by estate-level land clearance, with blurred lines between corporate firms and the
small-scale landowners they often contract out to. There is also a growing presence of mid-sized
actors that develop plantations but have scant or non-existent public profiles.
These actors gain official and unofficial concessions from local governments, whose leaders seek
capital for their budgets, their campaigns, and on some occasions their wallets. Haze does not
present the same reputational risks to these mid-level operatives as it does to large corporations like
Nestlé and Golden Agri-Resources – both of which have implemented haze prevention policies.
Hotter and drier: Second, the source areas of the haze are getting hotter and drier. Burning remains
an attractive method for land clearing because it is quick and efficient, requires minimal labour,
enriches soils, and acts as a default strategy in lieu of affordable alternatives. In years like 2015 with a
strong El Niño warming trend, fires often become large and difficult to control. In carbon-rich
peatlands, these fires can burn for weeks and spread far beyond their areas of origin; which in turn
problematises efforts to establish culpability. With climate change projections predicting warming
trends and drier months in equatorial Southeast Asia, these problems may well become more acute.
Long gestation: Third, the redoubled efforts to combat the haze are relatively new and will take time to
be effective. Indonesia’s levying of fines and arresting of executives send important signals, but the
legal processes surrounding these efforts take years and do not appreciably change the short-term
conditions on the ground in Indonesian plantations.
It remains difficult to identify haze-causing culprits even with new legislation, greater enforcement
ambitions, and better maps detailing where concessions are situated. Time may improve the
effectiveness of these mechanisms, but, as the current smoke demonstrates, they are not up to the
near-term challenge.
Hazy future
Despite these limitations, continued regional cooperation on the haze issue is imperative, without
viable alternatives. Affected Indonesian citizens suffer even more painfully than their neighbours
during acute haze episodes, and hope for solutions as much as anyone. Such solutions are taking
shape, but better outcomes may be years in the offing.
Such is often the case with transboundary environmental challenges, which leave impacted countries
vulnerable to effects that they cannot prevent through their own action. These countries are left to
respond to the environmental stress that they inherit at home, while trying to stimulate changes in
neighbouring territories.
Singapore is on such a trajectory, but, as Euston Quah and Tan Tsiat Siong recently wrote in the
Straits Times, Singaporeans will likely be asked to “accept that the haze will be with us for years to
come, and learn to live with it while mitigation efforts are ongoing”. This assessment seems likely to
bear out, as near-term solutions remain difficult to see.
Jackson Ewing is Director of Asian Sustainability at the Asia Society Policy Institute in New York. He
is also an Adjunct Fellow at the Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS) of the S.
Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
This is a new RSIS series on the latest regional haze issue.
Nanyang Technological University
Block S4, Level B4, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798
Tel: +65 6790 6982 | Fax: +65 6794 0617 | www.rsis.e
No. 206 – 1 October 2015 RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical issues and contemporary developments. The views of the authors are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced electronically or in print with prior permission from RSIS and due recognition to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email: RSISPublications@ntu.edu.sg for feedback to the Editor RSIS Commentary, Yang Razali Kassim.
