Research says: eat less meat; grow healthier

The research indicates that a more vegetable based diet is healthier for us. The so-called 'Jesus diet' which is basically 1st century palestinian peasant fare would have only had meat once a week maybe a bit more if the there were leftovers and maybe we should take a leaf out of that garden (geddit?).  The research says:

vegetarians had lower triglycerides, glucose levels, blood pressure, waist circumference, and body mass index (BMI). Semi-vegetarians also had a significantly lower BMI and waist circumference compared to those who ate meat more regularly.

I suspect, but the report doesn't say, that the issue is animal fats: if I'm right that means not substituting full-fat cheese for meat, for example ... so something more vegan as well.

So, not only is eating less meat better for the planet (less cattle etc, less resource use) and the food reserves of the world (feed less domestic animals, feed more humans) but it's actually healthier for us.
You know it makes sense; come on people; how can eating less meat NOT be the Christian thing to do?

Governance gaps and international Labour rights

Some shocking details about suppliers for some western products. Governance gaps -failed or tes, to be less euphemistic, allow slave labour to flourish. Underregulated markets do the equivalent of sending children up chimneys if we let them ...
Part of the problem is that some firms simply go round regulation by stepping into a governance gap or allowing a proxy to do so for them. We need an international response to a global set of problems -otherwise globalisation is a race to the bottom. Outsourcing has been a way for manufacturers and marketters to evade responsibilities. So contracts now increasingly embody human rights standards and these are more effective than 'police actions' by global HR agencies.
Building trust, partnership and co-operation can create the basis for a progressive 'strange new world' where TNC's actually offer the basis for human rights; listen to this mini-lecture to find out how ...
Ono of my recently-written liturgies has added agencies and corporations to praying for those who rule the world, this video gives a sense of why.
AuretvanHeerden_2010G.mp4 (video/mp4 Object)

FAILFaire: celebrating failure

I've been thinking quite a lot recently about failure. Or more precisely about the inevitability yet unpredictability of much failure. I've been coming across business gurus who point out that for every successful project there are many failures and that therefore we have to have a positive valuing of what we can gain from failures: we can learn and we can learn what to improve.
I've also been reflecting how counter-productive is a regime that doesn't really deal productively and compassionately with mistakes. By raising stakes unnecessarily, the energy that could be ploughed into learning and improving and even cleaning-up is ploughed instead into covering-up, in-fighting, blame-games and generally making a workplace less happy and productive.

So imagine my delight to find this: FAILFaire�|� Why FAILFaire?
Basically an organisation dedicated to sharing mistakes in an accepting environment in order for everyone to be able to learn from them: "We believe that only if we understand what DOESN’T WORK in this field and stop pushing our failures under the rug, can we collectively learn and get better, more effective, and have greater impact as we go forward."

I wonder what would happen if Christian literature would have more of this instead of the '10 successful ministries of sheep-stealing' books that abound. In fact, wouldn't you have thought that, with a crucified 'failure' at the heart of the faith, we'd be a bit better at valuing 'failure'? ... Yes, I know about the resurrection, but still; in terms of the generally accepted success-script for a Messiah, Jesus didn't do it properly. And so much of the successes of the early church in Acts seem to be presented rather as opportunist exploitations of God's proddings and acts rather than the playing out of successful strategies. Paul's missionary journeys seem more happenstance and trial-and-error than successful campaigns; if it doesn't work here, move on ...
I may be wrong, but ...

What a difference a TV makes

For a long time now, we've known that birthrate drops with development. I've tended to go along with the usual explanation that a higher birthrate makes sense with higher infant mortality and low economic security in old age; if those are addressed, then the birthrate falls, releasing wealth for other things than bringing children through early childhood until you can send them up chimneys (a reference to the UK's past history relating to this matter!). But perhaps there is another factor coming into view (literally): The source article is this:
What a difference a TV makes | Culture Making. The salient point relates to research in India and Brasil: "soaps in Brazil and India provided images of women who were empowered to make decisions affecting not only childbirth, but a range of household activities." This is significant when the possibility of seeing such images is extended through relatively cheap TV sets and the spread of satellite signal with the effect: "Within two years of getting cable or satellite, between 45 and 70 percent of the difference between urban and rural areas on these measures disappears. In Brazil, it wasn't just birthrates that changed as Globo's signal spread -- divorce rates went up, too."
The important thing to notice here is the way that a technology combined with a particular set of cultural products enables a new-to-them suite of options and way of seeing to be opened up and probably to be shared communally, discussed, assessed and imitated. There is a degree of hegemony being exercised; urban values overtaking 'traditional' rural ones. However, let's also note that they can be liberating. The lesson of the kinds of studies by Hebdige regarding subcultures is that people are adept, in appropriate circumstances, at bending cultural products to serve (some of) their interests often subverting them and re-purposing them in the process.

Of course the divorce dimension may seem alarming, and in many ways it may be. However, it may also reflect the possibility of women breaking from abusive relationships. And while I'm not saying I like divorce, it does seem to me that part of the concern in the background of the Bible's varied attitudes is probably concern for the economic and social security of women being ameliorated in a very patriarchal society. Jesus' words seem to take a pot shot at the disposable attitude to women's lives that 'liberal' interpretations of Mosaic law allowed to thrive. And while that's not the whole story, it seems to me to be an important dimension we neglect at our peril.

Development traps

This looks like an important book and here's a helpful summary of what it says. Shapevine Missional Training And Learning Resources: "at the bottom the villains have the guns and the money and they usually prevail. With hard work, thrift, and intelligence a society can climb out of poverty unless it gets trapped. The four big traps are 1) conflict, 2) natural resources, 3) being landlocked (with bad neighbors), and 4) bad governance."

Somali Piracy -the bigger picture

Imagine yourself living in this society, not as wealthy, but as ordinary and poor: "Somalia is one of the poorest, most violent, least stable countries anywhere on Earth. It suffers from severe drought and its people face hunger and violence on a daily basis. This is not a new situation, Somalia, especially the south, has been in this state for many years." To provide for your family, avoid hunger, what might you consider doing? I'm not condoning piracy, but I am saying that aggressive crackdowns are not going to help, the money would be far better spent on good aid, infrastructure and the support to rebuild civil society. Do we imagine that Somali culture venerates theft and violence? On the whole, no it does not. Let's help the nation to help itself. Quoting from the BBC story again: "In the face of overwhelming adversity they have created thriving businesses, operating entirely in the informal sector, and hospitals built and maintained with money sent home by the diaspora." -There *is* something to work with.
The story is here
BBC NEWS | World | Africa | Piracy symptom of bigger problem:


and the chance to do a little something about it is here: "Next week there is a UN-EU emergency meeting on Somalia. This is a significant opportunity and a massive global response could have a major impact on its outcomes. We need to stop piracy - and tackle its root causes. Sign the petition ... and we will deliver it at the emergency meeting." The 'we' is AVAAZ.

Slums can offer lessons to modern cities.

Now this is really intriguing: find the full article here: The world's slums are overcrowded, unhealthy - and increasingly seen as resourceful communities that can offer lessons to modern cities. - The Boston Globe And here's why I'm reassessing some assumptions: "... development specialists and slum dwellers themselves in arguing that slums have assets along with their obvious shortcomings. Their humming economic activity and proximity to city centers represent big advantages over the subsistence farming that many slum dwellers have fled. Numerous observers have noted the enterprising spirit of these places, evident not only in their countless tiny businesses, but also in the constant upgrading and expansion of homes. Longstanding slum communities tend to be much more tightknit than many prosperous parts of the developed world, where neighbors hardly know one another. Indeed, slums embody many of the principles frequently invoked by urban planners: They are walkable, high-density, and mixed-use, meaning that housing and commerce mingle. Consider too that the buildings are often made of materials that would otherwise be piling up in landfills, and slums are by some measures exceptionally ecologically friendly."
Recall, if you will, that only 150 years ago or so, much of London, and other UK cities were slum-ridden. And recall, too, that slum clearances in Britain in the 60's arguably made matters worse. Helping people to help themselves to improve has a lot to commend it. 'Simple' things like sewarage and power and clean water make such a difference. Communities can very often make very good decisions about things if they are empowered to do so and democratic control is facilitated. The rest of the article gives some examples to do with property rights and appropriate municipal support, for example.

Green economic development in Britain

Definitely worth looking at, this publication from NEF. Tackling Climate Change, Reducing Poverty Here's an example of good news which illustrates the point and why our government should be considering this path as a major part of its somewhat Keynesian plan to spend us out of recession: "in a deprived community in Braunstone, Leicester, an alliance of local groups helped raise funds for photovoltaic solar energy systems to be placed on the roofs of 50 south-facing houses. Local small firms were given training to install the solar panels, which have now cut carbon emissions on the estate and lifted residents out of fuel poverty"
And I say, perhaps this is another area that local churches ought to be looking at encouraging as part of their community development mission; something which should also build local resiliance.
See also this article in WorldChanging.

Kicking away the Ladder

This is a handy brief guide to the difficulty with neo-liberal approaches to development. Thanks to George Monbiot. [ Source:www.monbiot.com ]

Development aid in ICT

It's good to see FLOSS being in the forefront of enabling the two-thirds world to develop where ICT is involved. The EU has invested some money to research this.

The FLOSSInclude project will carry out an in-depth analysis of the technical, business and socio-political needs for the growth of FLOSS use, deployment and development in the target regions. The project further aims to build on the network developed during the course of the study to promote international collaboration between the EU and developing countries.

FLOSSInclude will expand on earlier work by some of the consortium partners, such as the groundbreaking FLOSSWorld study , by providing a rich contextual analysis based on the specific expertise and country experiences of the participating organisations and countries.

In pilot efforts, the partners will implement FLOSS solutions, tools and services to ensure they are cost-effective and practical for each environment. The result will be a roadmap for future EU development research cooperation, with concrete and validated solutions for clearly identified needs. Together with a massive push in dissemination and networking, the FLOSSInclude aims to ensure a lasting impact beyond the project duration.

Sometimes simple is best ...

just look at the effects of simply distributing free mosquito nets in East Africa.

Kenya's heath ministry has distributed 13.5m insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) across the country since 2003. As a result, the number of children sleeping under a net increased from 5% to 52% in less than five years.... the nets have had a major impact. In four high-risk areas of country that were closely monitored, the number of childhood deaths from malaria has fallen by 44%. Three hospitals in the malarial-prone coastal areas reported a drop in admissions of 57% in 2006, compared with 1999.

The big issue was making the nets free. There are some tings that simply must be done on the basis of need not ability to pay.

Imagine if our leaders were chosen on World Bank lines?

Illustrating neatly my reasons for supporting the campaign to democratise global instutions, there is this piece in today's Guardian.

"Imagine for a moment what the UK would look like if the written constitution that Gordon Brown thinks we need were based on the structures of the IMF and the World Bank.
Instead of being elected, every prime minister would be personally appointed by the leader of Surrey county council and the chancellor of the exchequer by the heads of London borough councils. Parliament would meet for two days twice a year, and MPs would only read out prepared statements, allowing no time for discussion. MPs' votes would be weighted according to their constituencies' incomes, so that rich areas accounting for 15% of the population would have 60% of the votes. The MP for Surrey would alone have twice as many votes as the MPs for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Northern England combined - enough to veto any constitutional change."

And there's more ...
Any way, David Woodward of NEF concludes the article thusly:

start by pushing for: the abolition of the principle of "economically weighted" voting that currently gives over half the votes to just seven countries - the G7; a transparent decision-making process; and an open and democratic system for the selection of the bank president and the IMF's managing director. Maybe then we could begin to develop a global governance system capable of meeting the global challenges of the 21st century.

A modest proposal but one that a supporter of UNPA could nod to.
Imagine if our leaders were chosen on World Bank lines | Guardian daily comment | Guardian Unlimited:

Micro credit explained

It seemed to me that this was quite a clear explanation of micro credit. So here it is for wider consideration. I was taken by the conclusion.

‘upside down banking’, because the Grameen model has completely reversed priorities to normal banks. A few big loans are much more profitable than thousands of little ones, and you want to lend to educated, reliable people, not the illiterate and destitute. Banks are normally impersonal institutions interested in money, but Grameen bank managers meet the borrowers at their homes, know all their stories, and hold weekly community meetings. And usually you would be turned away from a bank for having a poor credit rating. Grameen turns away people who have too much money. It is a business oriented to the needs of the least.

As Muhammad Yunus says: “It’s not people who aren’t credit-worthy. It’s banks that aren’t people worthy.”

upside-down banking « MAKE WEALTH HISTORY

Technorati Tags: micro-credit, development, banking

Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala with the Last Word on Aid

Encouraging news... "She tells us we’re seeing changes in Africa that we never thought would happen. We’ve seen annual growth of 5%, in some cases 6-7%, up from 2%. External debt has been massively reduced. Countries are building up foreign exchange reserves, shoring up their currencies. Private investment flows are increasing, remittances to Nigeria are skyrocketing, and there’s a net inflow of capital."
There are a number of important things said in this article about employment, aid and why China is perceived as good news (=infrastructure).
WorldChanging: Tools, Models and Ideas for Building a Bright Green Future: Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala with the Last Word on Aid:

World(Bank)Changing: A Letter to President-Elect Zoellick

An intriguing open letter to the incoming pres of the World Bank from the lovely people at WorldChanging (in particular, Jonathan Greenblatt)
"...The Bank should return to its core purpose as a bank of reconstruction and development, but infuse a sense of boldness and creativity into this mission. I might suggest a ten point plan, mixing principles, strategies and tactics, to jumpstart the process:
1. Rethink the Religion of Friedmanism. ...
2. Redefine the Metrics of Prosperity....
3. Embed a Culture of Bottom-Up-Led Innovation into Organization. ...
4. Create a Global Advisory Board of Social Entrepreneurs...
5. Launch Tiger Teams Focused on Big Cross-Border Problems...
6. Embark on a Listening Tour of the Global South....
7. Maintain a Focus on Corruption but Pursue Other Priorities....
8. Elevate Development Marketplace into permanent and persistent program....
9. Experiment to Scale Demonstration Models of Innovation....
10. Collaborate with Corporations and Foundation to Explore New Development Models. ...
You have a tremendous opportunity to change the World Bank and change the world as a result. I hope you will embrace this challenge.
Jonathan Greenblatt"

Interesting reading which by implication tells us what some of the big issues are. I think I would add a further point:
11. Investigate and bring recommendations on how to bring democratic accountability to the bank.
WorldChanging: Tools, Models and Ideas for Building a Bright Green Future: World(Bank)Changing: A Letter to President-Elect Zoellick:

Why it's bad for the rich to get richer

I'm seeing quite a lot of stuff lately that seems to suggest that the kinds of inequalities that unrestrained market forces tend to build up are bad for us. Part of that 'badness' is the way that those who have tend to affect the rest.

First have a look at this research on the effect of money on altruism. The net result being

In a series of nine experiments, researchers found that money enhanced people's motivation to achieve their own goals and degraded their behavior toward others.

Then, in this Guardian article, a number of considerations about how increasing affluence for a few actually does not deliver net benefits for the many, rather the reverse.

high pay rises among the top 1% are as inflationary as wage rises among the mass of the population. It's just that this inflation affects assets rather than goods and services. For years our rulers have insisted that one worker's wage rise is another's job loss. It is equally true that one person's fat-cat bonus is another's loss of home ownership prospects. It may be a job loss, too, since the Bank of England's concerns about an overheating housing market may cause it to raise interest rates. ... More important, they can hire the best accountants to minimise or wipe out their tax liabilities. If an increasing proportion of national income and wealth is taken by a tax-avoiding elite, the tax base ultimately shrinks. Increasingly, we must look to the philanthropic efforts of the rich to relieve poverty and to create social assets such as schools and arts centres. That sounds fine in principle, and Victorian philanthropy, free from the stultifying effects of public bureaucracy, is often held up as a model. But the result is a step backwards for democracy, with the super-rich deciding our social priorities. ... there is overwhelming evidence that as inequality grows a country becomes nastier. In The Impact of Inequality, Richard Wilkinson, professor of social epidemiology at Nottingham University, shows rates of violent crime and racism tend to be higher where the gap between rich and poor is greater. So firmly established is the link between homicide rates and inequality, according to Wilkinson, that many criminologists regard it as more important than any other environmental factor.

The comments are interesting too.
The real issue, as ever, becomes 'what do you do about it?'. But at least we have the research to rule out of court the stupidities of trickle-down and 'a rising tide lifts all boats' because the reality is that, retaining the metaphor,

a rising tide only lifts the boats that have already had money spent on them and that haven't been filled with boulders and concrete

or holed!

Oppressing the poor in order to enrich oneself, and giving to the rich, will lead only to loss.
- Proverbs 22:16-16

A return to the politics of envy could serve us well | Guardian daily comment | Guardian Unlimited:

Trickle down economics is a myth

Neo conservative economics are betrayed by the figures and shown up for the ideological smokescreen they are.

the notion that global economic growth is the only way of reducing poverty for the world's poorest people is the self-serving rhetoric of those who already enjoy the greatest share of world income. Based on the global distribution of income in 1993, even if the benefits of global growth were distributed evenly, it would benefit someone in the richest 1 per cent of the world's population 120 as much as someone in the poorest 10 per cent.

So let's not take any more guff about the benefits of growth filtering down to the poor and 'a rising tide lifts all boats' -comforting but merely feelgood talk; it's just not true. For it to be halfway true, different systems of trade and finance would have to be in place. And consider the minimal cost meaningful redistributive policies would have...

poverty could be reduced without growth by more effectively distributing what we already have: For example:
* redistributing just one per cent of the income of the richest 20 per cent of the world's population would have the same benefit as world growth of 20 per cent without redistribution. This is over ten times the average per capita growth rate of global GDP since 1981;
* the rate of poverty reduction achieved between 1981 and 2001 could have been achieved through the redistribution annually of just one tenth of one per cent of the income of the richest 10 per cent of the world's population.

What needs to happen?

...a shift in power relations, both globally and nationally, to move power from developed countries, elites and commercial interests to the majority of the world's population, the poor.

Global democracy instead of the current oligarchy, no -plutarchy, no -kleptarchy.
world economy giving less to poorest in spite of global poverty campaign says new research:
See also http://nouslife.blogspot.com/2006/12/why-its-bad-for-rich-to-get-richer.html