Climate fears for Bangladesh's future 2
part: 2
DfID is already starting to modify some aid programmes for the poorest of the poor who make their homes on shifting silt islands in the great rivers of Bangladesh.
The islands - known as choars - last on average about 20 years. Then the inhabitants are flooded out, and need to seek new land created elsewhere by the highly-dynamic rivers.
Locals say siltation levels appear to have diminished, so less new land is being created.
For Pulmala Begum, who lives on an embankment on the Brahmaputra, rebuilding has become commonplace; but each time she loses more. She has been displaced by flood waters six times.
"We used to have a house and cattle and now we've got no land where we can move to. This time we don't have any money to make another start, or to educate our children," she laments.
"We have nothing left, but we have to survive, so we've had to build our house from reeds."
The UK government is the biggest donor to Bangladesh, but its current annual aid package of £125m cannot hope to tackle the scale of the challenge now, let alone the problems that will come.
I understand that a review by Sir Nicholas Stern, commissioned by the UK's prime minister and chancellor to look at the economics of climate change, will conclude that rich nations need to do far more to adapt to the inevitable consequences of climate change.
It will also say developed countries must cut emissions immediately to minimise the effects.
Engineering solutions
Sir Nicholas' approach is criticised by some economists who argue that as climate change is beyond human control we should continue to maximise economic growth so we will be able to afford to pay for adaptation in the future.
In a recent article for the Spectator magazine, former chancellor Lord Lawson argued: "Far and away the most cost-effective policy for the world to adopt is to identify the most harmful consequences that may flow from global warming and, if they start to occur, to take action to counter them."
Lord Lawson suggests that a Dutch dyke-building engineer might solve the problems of Bangladesh.
The Stern review is likely to insist that both mitigation and adaptation are necessary, and will argue that economists have under-estimated the costs that climate change will impose and over-estimated the costs of cutting emissions.
The Dutch government itself rejects the optimistic view taken by Lord Lawson. A spokesman for the Dutch Embassy in Bangladesh told BBC News that it would be impossible to protect Bangladesh in the way Holland had been protected.
He said there were 230 rivers, which were much more dynamic than Holland's rivers, consistently undermining attempts to channel them through the sandy soil.
Mr Huq goes further: "It is ridiculous for people who know nothing about Bangladesh to make pronouncements on how much of it can or cannot be saved.
"Bangladesh is extremely vulnerable, and there is a major moral issue because this is not a problem that people here have caused," he said.
DfID is already starting to modify some aid programmes for the poorest of the poor who make their homes on shifting silt islands in the great rivers of Bangladesh.
The islands - known as choars - last on average about 20 years. Then the inhabitants are flooded out, and need to seek new land created elsewhere by the highly-dynamic rivers.
Locals say siltation levels appear to have diminished, so less new land is being created.
For Pulmala Begum, who lives on an embankment on the Brahmaputra, rebuilding has become commonplace; but each time she loses more. She has been displaced by flood waters six times.
"We used to have a house and cattle and now we've got no land where we can move to. This time we don't have any money to make another start, or to educate our children," she laments.
"We have nothing left, but we have to survive, so we've had to build our house from reeds."
The UK government is the biggest donor to Bangladesh, but its current annual aid package of £125m cannot hope to tackle the scale of the challenge now, let alone the problems that will come.
I understand that a review by Sir Nicholas Stern, commissioned by the UK's prime minister and chancellor to look at the economics of climate change, will conclude that rich nations need to do far more to adapt to the inevitable consequences of climate change.
It will also say developed countries must cut emissions immediately to minimise the effects.
Engineering solutions
Sir Nicholas' approach is criticised by some economists who argue that as climate change is beyond human control we should continue to maximise economic growth so we will be able to afford to pay for adaptation in the future.
In a recent article for the Spectator magazine, former chancellor Lord Lawson argued: "Far and away the most cost-effective policy for the world to adopt is to identify the most harmful consequences that may flow from global warming and, if they start to occur, to take action to counter them."
Lord Lawson suggests that a Dutch dyke-building engineer might solve the problems of Bangladesh.
The Stern review is likely to insist that both mitigation and adaptation are necessary, and will argue that economists have under-estimated the costs that climate change will impose and over-estimated the costs of cutting emissions.
The Dutch government itself rejects the optimistic view taken by Lord Lawson. A spokesman for the Dutch Embassy in Bangladesh told BBC News that it would be impossible to protect Bangladesh in the way Holland had been protected.
He said there were 230 rivers, which were much more dynamic than Holland's rivers, consistently undermining attempts to channel them through the sandy soil.
Mr Huq goes further: "It is ridiculous for people who know nothing about Bangladesh to make pronouncements on how much of it can or cannot be saved.
"Bangladesh is extremely vulnerable, and there is a major moral issue because this is not a problem that people here have caused," he said.
0 comments:
Post a Comment