The Future of Sustainability: Have Your Say!

Week Two - “Human Wellbeing and Sustainability”
Comment / Comentario / Commentaire

Denis Marsha Kabuuka, Sustainable Livelihoods International (SLINT) - Uganda

Moderating team: Denis Kabuuka says that irrespective of what part of the world people are from, the bottom line for “good life” means being able to easily and sustainably access the basics of life – food, water, shelter, energy, health care, leisure, freedom and security. He introduces an initiative in Uganda which is attempting to scale-up poverty eradication while at the same time sustainably manage the environment by empowering poor people to diversify their livelihood opportunities by engaging in different environmentally-friendly income-generating activities and off-farm micro enterprises. International organizations could do more to promote trade rules that allow the rural poor to earn fair incomes from their produce.

Denis Kabuuka afirma que dejando a un lado el origen de las personas, el buen vivir significa tener acceso fácil a condiciones básicas para vivir: alimento, agua, alojamiento, energía, salud, esparcimiento, libertad y seguridad. Comenta sobre una iniciativa en Uganda que intenta abordar la erradicación de la pobreza y el manejo sostenible del ambiente. A través del empoderamiento de la gente pobre, la iniciativa busca diversificar las oportunidades de sustento a través de involucramiento en actividades productivas amigables al ambiente. Las organizaciones internacionales podrían hacer mucho más para promover regulaciones de ambiente que permitan a los pobres obtener ingresos más justos por sus productos.

----

This week’s discussion on “Human Well-being and Sustainability” has raised a number of very pertinent issues that need to be further pursued, not only as a matter of academic discourse but in policy-making processes at different levels and in practical interventions on the ground. I share most of the views expressed by different participants. I fully agree with Dr. Khosla that natural resources and environmental services are the most important foundations for human well-being, even more than the modern technologies.

I also concur with Dr. Callarious’ point that environmental sustainability should not be compromised in the struggle to fight poverty and improve people’s livelihoods. In this context, however, I don’t share Mr. Dhakal’s argument that conservation demands induced by agencies like IUCN have further escalated poverty, inequity and social injustice. While there have been some omissions on part of some conservation organizations by focussing more on supporting conservation objectives and allocating less resources for poverty alleviation, I don’t think it is fair to characterise such organizations as working against poor people.

It is not debatable that environmental degradation is threatening human well-being, especially in developing countries like my own, Uganda, where a majority of people relies on natural resources for their immediate survival. For example, agriculture in Uganda underpins the livelihood of more than 90% of the population and is the "engine" for the national economy. We have to devise new tools and empower people to secure “good life” while at the same time maintaining the diversity, health and long-term productivity of the natural resources and the supporting environment.

I agree with Dr. Pervaz and Dr. Murphy that the meaning of human well-being and the definition of what is “good life” depends on what part of the world one is talking about. Indeed the case described by Suresh Kumar clearly illustrates this point. However, irrespective of what part of the world, the bottom line for “good life” means being able to easily and sustainably access the basics of life – food, water, shelter, energy, health care, leisure, freedom and security.

The biggest challenge in most developing countries is fighting poverty without compromising the environment and its natural resources. Poverty is highest among the rural populations and sometimes in the struggle to meet their basic daily needs, they invevitably over-use the few resources available and in the process compromise their own long-term sources of livelihood. There is a need to assist the poor to address this challenge. A number of options exist,

including: introduction of appropriate technologies; capacity-building and empowerment of individuals and groups through training, technical assistance and extension services in order to build appropriate local skills, knowledge and attitudes; public awareness in a wide range of socio-cultural and environmental issues; provision access to credit and other resources as well as ensuring equitable access to markets and opportunities to generate household incomes.

SLINT-Uganda is applying the above approach as one of the means of scaling-up of poverty eradication while at the same time fostering sustainable management of the environment. It seeks to empower poor people to diversify their livelihood opportunities by engaging in different environmentally-friendly income-generating activities and off-farm micro enterprises. It also promotes sustainable food security and preservation of the natural resource base while contributing to building community self-reliance. These activities aim to ensure enhanced local availability of basic livelihood resources (food, clean water, sustainable energy and others), improved nutrition and employment for the poor.

In recognition of the fact that many of the rural poor in developing countries have limited access to basic resources and markets, there a need to expand opportunities for them to increase their agricultural production in an environmentally-friendly manner and to access competitive markets for their produce.

Institutions, such as IUCN, should play a key role in advocating policies and international trade rules that would allow the rural poor to earn fair incomes from their produce (crops, fish, animal products, etc), reduce the pressure on the natural ecosystems and foster environmental sustainability.