Welcome to YLOAN.COM
yloan.com » Customer Service » Climate Change Reduction Or green Global Welfare?
Marketing Advertising Branding Careers-Employment Change-Management Customer Service Entrepreneurialism Ethics Marketing-Direct Negotiation Outsourcing PR Presentation Resumes-Cover-Letters Sales Sales-Management Sales-Teleselling Sales-Training Strategic-Planning Team-Building Top7-or-Top10-Tips Workplace-Communication aarkstore corporate advantages development collection global purchasing rapidshare grinding wildfire shipping trading economy wholesale agency florida attorney strategy county consumer bills niche elliptical

Climate Change Reduction Or green Global Welfare?

The idea seems simple enough

The idea seems simple enough. The rich world would pay the poor world to

save a type of natural commodity from which we all benefit trees.

Forests and jungles absorb carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, which

is stored in trees. Cutting trees down releases CO2 and triggers the emission


of additional greenhouse gases from denuded soils. Forest loss and land

degradation could be responsible for 20 percent of the planet-warming

gases attributable to human activities, some experts suggest.

That has made the question of what to do about forests central to talks

underway this week in Poznan, Poland, that aim to shape a new global

agreement to fight global warming. Scientists and environmentalists want

mechanisms to reward the developing world for saving its forests

incorporated into any such treaty.

Even champions of the idea, however called R.E.D.D., for Reducing

Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation admit they have

reservations.

They acknowledge that it will be hard to monitor whether people or

companies are cutting down forests and jungles they have promised to

preserve, or whether deforestation simply is shifting to unregulated areas.

They also acknowledge that it will be hard to guarantee that promises

made by one government to preserve forests will be respected by future

landowners, governments or regimes.

[At the same time, groups like The Center for International Forestry Research,

or Cifor, say that a properly designed system could help with alleviating

poverty, improving governance, and protecting biodiversity and other

environmental services.

REDD also has the potential to achieve significant co-benefits, over and

above reducing carbon emissions, said Frances Seymour, the director

general of the center, which released a new report on Friday Moving ahead

with REDD: Issues, options and implications, which details ways that paying

people to maintain forests could be a success.]

Even so, the idea has triggered a furious response from groups that say that

the developing world has a right to boost its economic development through

forestry. They say that the World Bank, Australia, the European Union, Norway

and environmental groups like WWF and Greenpeace are overlooking how better

management of forests rather than preserving forest stocks may be the

most effective way to reduce CO2 emissions.

One such group, World Growth, disputes that deforestation is generating

nearly 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, and argues that when

timber is processed into wood products or paper, as the majority of logged

timber is, the carbon remains stored even when dumped into a landfill.

World Growth, which describes itself as a non-profit organization that favors

globalization and free trade to help disadvantaged populations, says the

strategy also risks reducing food production in poor countries and would halt

job creation and ways for countries to generate taxes and earn export income.

From a World Growth report issued this week, titled Winners All: How Forestry

Can Reduce Both Climate Change Emissions and Poverty:

If the leading mitigation strategy for forestry is deforestation and, as is proposed

in the R.E.D.D. strategy, developing countries are paid to cease deforestation,

they will be paid to cease conversion of land to produce food and sustain society.

This is an anti-development strategy. And where this activity reduced commercial

forestry in plantations and natural forest, this would remove an activity which


created jobs, generated taxes and earned export income. Productive economic

activity is halted and in return money is paid. This is a form of Green global welfare.

dam construction

by: glennoliver
The Lifetime Value Of A Customer Enhance Contact Center Outsourcing Through Expertise And Facilities UK Option Advisory Service Keeping Your Car On The Road With An Official Honda Service Official Dealerships Or Generic Mechanics For Your Service? Testimonials From Foundation Repair Customers Benefits Of Comprehensive Data Conversion Services Outsourcing Data Entry Services: Important Practice For Business Virtual Office And Answering Service fort lauderdale moving services Virtual Office Phone Service With Voicemail Use AOC Services to buy AOC Gold today! Outsourcing From Multilingual Call Center
print
www.yloan.com guest:  register | login | search IP(216.73.216.20) California / Anaheim Processed in 0.035898 second(s), 7 queries , Gzip enabled , discuz 5.5 through PHP 8.3.9 , debug code: 108 , 4269, 133,
Climate Change Reduction Or green Global Welfare? Anaheim