Daily Archives: November 7, 2020

Internal disaplacements fuelled by climate change to economic analysis of rural middle class, DTE tracks new books on environment and development from leading authors

Climate Change, Disasters, and Internal Displacement in Asia and the Pacific: A Human Rights-Based Approach | Matthew Scott, Albert Salamanca | Routledge | November 16, 2020

This book examines how states in eight countries across Asia and the Pacific address internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change.

The specific cases in the book also reflect critically on the term displacement and the wider normative framework within which this phenomenon is conceptualised and addressed.

Coalitions in the Climate Change Negotiations | Carola Klck, Paula Castro, Florian Weiler, Lau fjord Blaxekjr | Routledge |23 November, 2020

This edited volume provides both a broad overview of cooperation patterns in the UNFCCC climate change negotiations and an in-depth analysis of specific coalitions and their relations.

Land Acquisition and Resource Development in Contemporary India | Shashi Ratnaker Singh | Cambridge University Press | November 30, 2020

This book derives from research and fieldwork in the rural and tribal hinterland of India, particularly in the mineral rich states. It looks at the nuances of land and resource politics and summarizes the long-standing land acquisition and mining debate.

It discusses the relevant theoretical arguments from inter-disciplinary perspectives and develops an argument through the case study of Singrauli, a region in Madhya Pradesh in India that has seen various 'regimes of dispossession' in the last six decades in India.

Beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic: Envisioning a Better World by Transforming the Future of Healthcare | Amb Pradeep K Kapur, Joseph M Chalil | The UNN Corporation | October 16, 2020

This book makes a comprehensive study of all aspects that have been affected by the coronavirus pandemic while proposing practical ways to deal with those challenges.

Till We Win: Indias Fight Against The Covid-19 Pandemic | Chandrakant Lahariya, Gagandeep Kang, Randeep Guleria | Penguin | November 23, 2020

Offering insights on how India continues to fight the pandemic, it is a book for the people, for political leaders, policymakers and physicians, with the promise and potential to transform public health in India.

Crisis and Predation: India, COVID-19, and Global | The Research Unit for Political Economy | Monthly Review Press | November 15, 2020

Crisis and Predation shows how this tight-fistedness stems from the fact that global financial interests oppose any sizable expansion of public spending by India, and that Indian rulers readily adhere to their guidance.

And yet, this book contends, India could defy the pressures of global finance in order to address the basic needs of its people.

JP to BJP: Bihar after Lalu and Nitish | Santosh Singh| SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd | December 1, 2020

This book looks closely at the process of saffronisation that has taken place in landscape, more marked than any other by milestones of political shifts and movements.

That Tuesday in November: How Presidential Elections Changed History | Mike Henry | Rowman & Littlefield | November 1, 2020

Like many aspects of the nations history, its elections have had their share of behind the scenes activity and drama.

This work is an examination of each of the presidential contests and some of the unusual events surrounding them such as the back room convention deals, compromised candidates, campaign strategies, both successful and failures; and major effects on the outcomes due to such inventions as television.

In some cases, a swing of just a few votes to another candidate could have had a profound effect on Americas future.

The Economics of Venture Capital Firm Operations in India | Kshitija Joshi | Cambridge University Press | October 29, 2020

This book studies diverse categories of venture capital (VC) firms in India based on their ownership type (domestic vs foreign), stage of investment (early vs growth stage) and VC investment team composition (entrepreneurial experience vs investing experience).

Contested Capital: Rural Middle Classes in India | Maryam Aslany | Cambridge University Press | November 30, 2020

In India, the middle class has become one of the key categories of economic analysis and developmental forecasting. The discussion suffers from one major oversight: It assumes that the middle class resides uniquely in the cities.

The book, however, demonstrates more than a third of Indias middle class is rural, and that 17 per cent of rural households belong to the middle class.

The book brings this vast and dynamic population into view, so confronting some of the most crucial neglected questions of the contemporary global economy.

We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.

Read more:

Book Digest: History of US presidential elections, India's fight against COVID-19 and more - Down To Earth Magazine

Among reactions from around the county, Biden's youngest brother Frank described a family call when they heard Joe Biden won. He said they talked about Biden's late son, Beau, who made his father promise that he would remain in public life before he died of brain cancer.

On Saturday, Joe Biden won the presidency over President Donald Trump and Palm Beach County and Florida reacted.This is a developing story. Check back for updates. Go here for the final electoral vote count.

The president-elect's youngest brother said Saturday that thelarge, extended Biden family was on a call when they learned Joe Biden had won the presidential race.

Frank Biden recalled the moment his sister, Valerie Biden Owens, broke the news."You could hear a pin drop."

But the younger Biden sibling, a Palm Beach County resident, said the family's initial reaction was not about politics. Instead, they thought ofBiden's late son, Beau, who made his father promise that he would remain in public life before he died of brain cancer.

"You could hear her tearing up," Biden said of his older sister. "And then we all realized that this is Beau's moment. This is Beau's moment. Beau is with us. Palpably with us."

More: Sole Republican on Palm Beach County Commission: Presidential race isn't over

Frank Biden also said he and the family were also overcome with emotion watching the street celebrations surge across the country.

"No one anticipated this. It's spontaneous," he said. "It's overwhelming. But it's overwhelmingly peaceful, overwhelmingly joyous. And this has got nothing to do with the unburdening of resentment. This is really good."

Biden said it was also reflective of a change in the national mood from polarization to an embrace of unity.

"It's a celebration of that spirit of we can believe again. This business of all of us being able to summon our better angels," he said. "It's got everything to go with the joy. And the possibilities again. God, can you conceive it?"

For Father Frank OLoughlin, the first thoughts of a Joe Biden presidency were the eventual release of immigrant children from cages.

We reclaimed our souls, said the director of the Guatemalan-Maya Center in Lake Worth Beach about Biden winning the presidency.

Under President Donald Trump, federal authorities separated children and infants from parents and guardians who had entered the United Statesillegally or were seeking asylum. The children have been kept in detention for the past three years while the Trump administration lost track ordeported parents of 545 of the minors.

OLoughlin said the election of Biden showed the country did not bend to the disposition of any president and noted that Trump from the start of his 2016 campaign targeted Hispanics. Biden has pledged to stop construction on Trump's border wall with Mexico.

For the complete story, go here.

State Sen.Bobby Powell of West Palm Beach celebrated Bidens win by going out for ice cream with his wife and daughter. He said a Biden presidency is not only important for his family and his constituents, but for future generations.

I have a 2-year-old that will now live in the United States of America, because her whole life shes lived in the Divided States of America, he said.

And for those Americans who have felt the sting of inequity and division, he said, a Biden presidency means even more.

It means that the American flag, that over the last few years has become a symbol of polarization, will once again become a symbol of unity in this country, he said.

Powells hopes for the Biden administration include tackling the economic gap between Black and white citizens and offering everyone affordable healthcare.

More: Minorities in Palm Beach County look for big changes under Biden presidency

I would like to see a country where people dont have to work three jobs to pay the rent," he said. Im looking forward to a system where it becomes more equitable and conversations are heard and people are talked to and not talked at.

Equally important, he said, is that Vice President-elect Kamala Harris has inspired a generation of Black people to get involved in the political process.

It means that there is an opportunity for our voices to be heard and opportunities to have a better chance of serving in higher positions and show our children that it can be done, he said.

Just like any neighborhood, opinions about Saturday'snews in Palm Beach varied from somber to joyful.

"I'm disappointed," said John Scarpa, a longtime friend of Trump. "As an American, I'm worried aboutour future."

Kevin Byrne's take was different.

"I have regained my faith in my fellow citizens," the island resident said. "It's like waking up from a nightmare, especially this past week."

For the complete story, go here.

Hal Valeche, the sole Republican Palm Beach County commissioner in President Donald Trumps home county, said the race is not over yet.

"I have heard some very disturbing things over the last few days and I think the president is going to use every potential legal resource to make sure that we get a fair count," Valeche said.

Specifically, Valeche pointed to what he viewed as troubling discrepancies in battleground states, mirroring talking points and lawsuits from the Trump campaign: the absentee ballots in Pennsylvania received after Election Day, which the state Supreme Court allowed due to mail delays; votes counted for Trump that were meant to be for Biden in a Michigan county, which turned out to be human error and not a software glitch; and allegations in another lawsuit that thousands of nonresidents castballots in Nevada.

For the complete story, go here.

Joe Budd, President of Club 45 USA, was in a meeting when the networks called the race. But he wasnt surprised, he said, because the votes were trending in Bidens direction.

Still, the national loss does not diminish the incredible work that the state party and Trump fan clubs did to bring Florida home for the president in a resounding fashion, he said.

I think youll see that Florida is going to be observed by Republicans as a whole as to how we did what we did, he said. We kept great enthusiasm up for a long, long time. It wasnt just last minute, get-out-the vote efforts it built for three years. It was built and ready to go.

While Trump has his negatives, Budd said, he still will have a lot of influence in helping other Republicans get elected in Florida for years to come.

Like in 2018 when he backed Ron DeSantis over [GOP primary rival Adam]Putnam and instantly changed that race when he stepped in, Budd said.

Budd said Trump can also teach other politicians a thing or two about keeping their words.

Id like to see him play a role going forward where he holds politicians to keep the promises that they make," he said. "Thats something the president did extremely well.

More than anything, Budd said, he is thrilled with the number of Florida Republicans who attended rallies and turned out the vote for the president.

More: Trump bet big on winning the Hispanic vote in Miami and Florida ... and it paid off

Im extremely proud of the work locally, he said. The enthusiasm was off the charts and they brought it home here in Florida. We did our job in Palm Beach County, and obviously, Cuban-Americans did their job in Miami-Dade.

State Senator Lori Berman, D-Boynton Beach, said shecould barely contain her excitement at the news of Bidens win.

I'm just so elated, Im so happy, and Ive been crying tears of joy, she said.

Even the loss of two congressional seats and Trump's resounding victory in Florida could not put a damper on Bidens win, she said.

After we didnt win Florida, and we didnt have the victory and gains that I thought we would have on the state and Senate level, I still thought that, if Biden won, it would negate my disappointment, she said. It did, and I truly do feel that way.

Berman said the Florida Democratic Party could take a cue from Georgia activist Stacy Abrams and focus on registering more voters, she said.

They increased their registration and we didn't have a commensurate increase, she said of the Republicans. Theres a lot more work beyond that, but I think thats a starting place.

More: On the island of Palm Beach, reactions to Biden win range from gloom to elation

And while Trump may be leaving the White House, his influence will undoubtedly persist in Florida after he returns home to Palm Beach, Berman said and not in a good way.

I think Trumps legacy in Florida is Gov.Ron DeSantis, she said. And I think thats unfortunate. We still have the COVID crisis, which has been poorly mismanaged on the federal level and similarly poorly mismanaged on the state level."

As the congresswoman representing her most famous constituent, President Donald Trump, Lois Frankel called Bidens win a relief and a joyful day of celebration.

Its been a long, pretty dreadful four years, she said. Nothing is going to overshadow today. We have a decent, compassionate man to be our president. We've elected the first woman of color to a national office.

When the celebrations subside, Frankel said, it will be time for the Democratic Party to take a good look at where it went wrong in Florida, where Trump took home a resounding, consolation win.

We know things went awry in (Miami-Dade) County, thats a given, she said. But that wasn't the only part of the state that was disappointing.

Despite the economic devastation, the loss of lives and the pervasiveness of the coronavirus pandemic, voters still came out in large numbers for Trump, she said. And thats something Democrats can learn from.

We have in Donald Trump an extraordinary character, and I dont mean that in a good way," she said. "It was a cult of personality.

Despite the legacy of division, corruption, and incompetence that Trump will leave in his wake, Frankel said, she believes that Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris are the right people to unite the country.

And while Frankel cant ever really get away from Trump because he lives only a stones throw from her house, she said shes made her peace with it, all things considered.

Id rather have him on the golf course than in the White House, she said.

Anne Marie Delgado, president of the Trump Team 2020 club, said she rejected projections that Biden would win the hard-fought campaign.

"We've got thousands and thousands going out," vowed Delgado, saying that the members of her statewide network of clubs would be out to make the case that the election would be settled in the courts.

Delgado said she and the club's members insist only "legal ballots" should be counted. That means ballots that arrived after the Nov. 3 deadline must not be counted if an extension is not part of that state'selections law.

She said the final word on the 2020 presidential race would be from court orders stopping what she alleged was the counting of illegal ballots.

"Stop thesteal," said Delgado. "This is so unusual the way this particular election, nationwide, has been run."

On the campaign trail, Trump had warned that a Biden win would lead to a crash in stock markets. But on Saturday,Bankrate.comsenior economic analyst Mark Hamrick said the capital markets and investing isn't necessarily guided by who wins the White House.

"Stock markets perform well under all kinds of administrations, including Democratic ones," said Hamrick. "Ultimately what's most important for financial markets is an economy that is conducive to generating corporate profits in a low-interest rate environment or at least an environment that does not see burgeoning inflation or any other significant issue associated with economic distress."

Hamricklauded what he said were some actions by Trump that boosted investor and business bullishness. But he cautioned that Trump also pursued policies that created instability in the markets, including a trade war.

He said after four tumultuous Trump years in office the markets may embrace stability from Biden.

"Business leaders will, I think, be at least more comfortable with the predictability of a Biden presidency," he said.

As for some Biden promises, such as abrogating the 2017 tax cuts, Hamrick said a lot depends on what happens with control of the U.S. Senate.

I don't think it's time to assume any of that will be flying through Congress. And we've seen stock markets perform just fine when tax brackets were higher.

Hamrick also said the markets might cheer policies to address climate change that could open investment opportunities.

In addition, Biden's focus on bringing the coronavirus pandemic under control may also be applauded on Wall Street: as might approval of a renewed economic stimulus by a lame-duck Congress.

His one concern: The mushrooming national debt.

The Trump administration didn't do future taxpayers any favors in the sense of presiding over policies that grew the national debt significantly. And those are chickens that will come home to roost. It's just a question of when and what's done over time to address them."

Michael Barnett, Chairman of the Republican Party of Palm Beach County, said he has faith Trump will still prevail. Barnett sent the following statement to the Palm Beach Post:

"This election is far from over. The Republican Party of Palm Beach County stands strongly behind President Trump and the Trump campaign's effort to challenge voter fraud in the courts. We delivered Florida handily for President Trump, including over 323,000 votes in Palm Beach County alone ...The news media do not certify elections. Nothing official has been decided. When the dust settles, and the illegal votes have been separated from the legal votes, President Trump will be declared the winner."

Florida Democratic Party Chair Terrie Rizzo released the following statement:

Congratulationsto President-Elect Joe Biden and Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris. Today we celebrate the start of a new chapter for our country. We saw record-breaking vote totals with Joe Biden winning more votes than any President in history. Todays win was a victory for America and a victory for the millions of volunteers who gave their time, their heart and their soul to secure this outcome, and we thank them for their commitment to elect leadership that will build America back better.

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris will work tirelessly to improve the lives of every single American. Their inclusive, clear-eyed leadership is precisely what we need to restore the soul of this nation. The Biden-Harris administration will also make history, as the brilliant Kamala Harris will be both the first woman and the first Black and Southeast Asian Vice President.

We have much work to do, as a nation and as a state, but Joe Biden has never given up when things are difficult, and neither will we. Along with all Florida Democrats, I cannot wait for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris to be sworn in as the next President and Vice President of the United States."

Stephen Gaskill, president of the Florida LGBTQ+ Democratic Caucus, issued this statement:"Once again, we will have a president who understands and cherishes the role of US leadership throughout the world, defends our civil rights, respects our laws, believes in science, and recognizes the principle that we are one united citizenry working toward our common goals..."

"In President-Elect Joe Biden and Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris, the United States has the most progressive and the most pro-LGBTQ leadership agenda in history."

Trump's record on LGBTQ+ issues fell way short of his boasting, Gaskill said.

"Despite his sometimes effusive praise for things he says he has done for LGBTQ community, he really was horrific for us, especially for the trans community," he said, citing Trump's efforts to ban transgender people from the military, allow homeless shelters to discriminate against transgender people,and rolling back Obama-era regulations that prohibited health care providers and insurance companies from discriminating against transgender individuals. "It is just appalling and really shows his disdain for the breadth of the LGBTQ community."

Gaskill said the LGBTQ community is hopeful that among Biden's first actions is passing the Equality Act, which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, public accommodations, public education, federal funding, credit, and the jury system.

"The Equality Act guarantees civil rights protections for everyday life," said Gaskill. "Passing that will be as monumental as the marriage ruling."

Americahas rid itself of the worst president in our history," said Rick Wilson, a founder of The Lincoln Project, a group of Republicans and former party members who worked to defeat Trump. "Ithas been sweeping repudiation of the kind of malevolent character that permeated the White House.

Winning both the electoral college and the popular vote was very much a referendum of Donald Trump, Wilson said.

What about GOPand Trump charges of socialists and radical leftists who will control the Biden administration?

Trumps victory in Florida tarnishes swing-state image

Dont say the word socialism in South Florida," he added. "Its a bad thing. It did not help their cause at all. It did not help the reality on the ground politically. Trump found one of the bright spots and took advantage of it. It was never going to come out any other way with the Cubans.

Wilson said he did not expect Biden to win Florida, so they focused their energies on other states. But he said the role the Lincoln Project played was pivotal.

"The Democratic Party of Florida cannot organize a two-car motorcade," Wilson said. "They are terrible at this work nothing personal against any one person. The Florida GOP is the best-run Republican Party in the country. I cant tell you how many times I said you have to push back on this right away, you have to assertively knock this down today. But they couldnt and wouldnt do it because they were afraid of making the Bernie bros upset."

The one consolation for Trump in the election's resultswas the president's overwhelming victory in his adopted state, Florida.

Trump "whitewashed" Biden in the state, as one pollster noted, saying that given Florida's history of razor-thin results, the president's 3.4% margin of victory equaled a landslide.

Trump's coattails extended to flipping two Miami congressional seats from blue to red and retaining a vacant seatin Naples.What Republican state officials called a "red tsunami" also resoundingly thwarted the spending of millions by Democratic and progressive coalitions to flip the Florida House or at leasteven the partisan ranks in Tallahassee.

View original post here:

Palm Beach County reaction: Biden's youngest brother describes emotional call with family: 'This is Beau's moment' - Palm Beach Post

PORT ANGELES Clallam County, theupper-left corner stripof the Pacific Northwest in the shadowof the Olympic Mountains, sure knows how to pick a winner.

A majority of itsvoters has picked the victorious ticket for president since 1980, swinging across the chasmof partisan politics five times most recentlyfor President-electJoe Biden, following the county'ssupport of President Donald Trump four years ago.

Even more astonishing: in a century, Clallam's majority has gone for the losing candidate just twice: in 1968 and 1976.

Philip Capogna harvests lavender at Sunshine Herb & Lavender Farm in Sequim in this June 8, 2016 file photo.(Photo: KITSAP SUN FILE PHOTO)

It's a feat that may be unrivaled across the country. Yetthose in the largely forestedcounty of 77,000 can only guess at why it just keeps getting it right.

"We're a rural county, sort of out here at the end of the country, which has fostered a sense of independence," said Mark Ozias, one of the county's threecommissioners. "Many people here are willing to crossover and vote for the individual, rather than the party."

An electorate more politically balanced and nimble is showcased in the local sphere: Ozias, a Democrat andresident near the retirement community of Sequim,shares the county commission's seats with a Republican and an Independent.

"People try to evaluate things as they are," said Randy Johnson, who serves as the Independent on the Commission.

A number of articles, including in the Wall Street Journal,have appeared in the media in the past year showcasing places like Clallam, and bringing to the surface this insignificant if fascinatingtrend. Yet almost every county featured voted for the Trump/Pence ticket this year, thrusting Clallam into more exclusive territory.

From atop the lookout tower at the end of the city pier, visitors take photos of the MV Coho as it heads for Victoria, BC. in this June 7, 2015 file photo.(Photo: KITSAP SUN FILE PHOTO)

A trio of bellwether counties outside Toledo, Ohio including Ottawa County, perfect since 1964 all went for Trump by sizeable margins. Vigo County, Indiana, on the Illinois borderwith a winning stretch to 1956, also went red this year, breaking its streak. And the longest accurate predictor of all Valencia County, south of Albuquerque, New Mexico broke its streak this year of having voted by a majority for every presidential winner since Dwight D. Eisenhower won in 1952.

Others come close, but haven't been perfect since 1980:Northampton County, Pennsylvania,outside Philadelphia, has gotten it right all but three times in the last century, and likely will again this year. But Clallam has only gotten it wrongtwice over the past 100 years.

The first episode of Star Wars was not even in theaters yet when a small margin of Clallam County residents went for the ticket of President Gerald Ford and Bob Dole. That was the last time the county's majority was wrong, as the Democratic ticket of Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale was victoriousin 1976.

From there, Clallam has gotten it right: twice for Ronald Reagan, once for George H.W. Bush and then twice for Bill Clinton. The county flipped to George W. Bush twice in the 2000s, and then to Barack Obama for two terms. In 2016, it flipped again to Trump, and now has made the shift back to Biden, by a 21,964 to 19,387 votemargin as of returns on Friday.

A couple takes in the view from a log on the shore of Ediz Hook in Port Angeles in this June 7, 2015 file photo.(Photo: KITSAP SUN FILE PHOTO)

Kate Dexter, the council-appointed mayor of Port Angeles, said the county's demographics play a role in picking the winners the country at-large does.

We are similar to the national average which makes us a microcosm of the U.S., she said.

Clallam is less affluent than the country at large, at $46,120 per capita compared to $54,446 in the nation. Almost 30 percent of the population is over 65, compared with about 17 percent nationally, according to census statistics. And it is less diverse than the country, though it is home to the Hoh, Quileute,Makah, Lower Elwha Klallam, and Jamestown SKlallam Tribes that make up more than five percent of the county's population.

In recent years, a resource economy of forestry and fisheries has been reduced, in its place a robust tourism that includes hikers to Olympic National Park, ferry-goers to Victoria, British Columbia, and yes, even fans of the Twilight book series that journey to its fictional setting in far-west Forks.

Visitors take in the view from atop the lookout tower at the end of the Port Angeles City Pier in this Sunday, June 7, 2015 file photo.(Photo: KITSAP SUN FILE PHOTO)

Stuart Elway, a longtime pollster based in Washington state who grew up in Grays Harbor County, noted many of Washington's coastal counties have gone from blue to red in recent years. His home countyhadn't voted for a Republican since Herbert Hoover,before supporting Trump in 2016 and 2020.

Even he was unaware of Clallam County's accuracy at going with the winds of the national electorate.

"I could save a lot of money just by following Clallam County," he joked.

Josh Farley is a reporter coveringthe militaryfor the Kitsap Sun. He can be reached at 360-792-9227, josh.farley@kitsapsun.com or on Twitter at@joshfarley.

Please consider supporting local journalism in Kitsap County with a digital subscription to the Sun.

Read or Share this story: https://www.kitsapsun.com/story/news/2020/11/07/clallam-county-extends-three-decade-streak-picking-president-elect/6182335002/

See more here:

What does Clallam County know? Voters just chose a winner for the tenth straight election - Kitsap Sun

The South China Sea and the Arctic are increasingly grouped as strategic theaters rife with renewed great-power competition. This sentiment permeates current affairs analysis, which features geopolitical links between the two maritime theaters. And these assessments are not resigned to hot takes the linkage features at senior policy levels, too. Consider, for example, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeos rhetorical question, Do we want the Arctic Ocean to transform into a new South China Sea, fraught with militarization and competing territorial claims?

To what extent are Chinas challenges to maritime order in the South China Sea a signal for how it will approach the Arctic? Understanding the differences as well as the similarities between the South China Sea and Arctic geopolitical competitions is crucial to predicting the strategic implications of future maritime posturing and policies from Beijing. Comparing the South China Sea flashpoint and the Arctic in the context of strategic competition highlights how maritime revisionism is better understood as maritime exceptionalism. Yet comparisons often fail to provide an accurate picture of the internal geopolitical climates in each region, and we argue that it is too simplistic to extrapolate the trends in one theater and apply them to the other. China and Russia approach the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in a localized and interest-based way when it comes to the South China Sea and Arctic regions. These localized approaches to the law of the sea has implications for understanding challenges to multilateral rules-based governance of the global commons.

The Same, but Different

Both the South China Sea and Arctic are home to increasing great-power naval posturing, featuring active great powers intent on making maritime claims inconsistent with UNCLOS and asserting exceptional jurisdictional rights. The unwillingness of the United States to ratify UNCLOS while claiming that the portions of UNCLOS related to maritime claims have status and power as customary international law makes the legal and institutional picture murkier. Yet the extent to which the South China Sea and the Arctic are comparable as contested commons is limited.

First, there are crucial geographical differences. Although the Arctic is the worlds smallest ocean, it is still five times larger than the South China Sea, and home to delineated maritime spaces and functioning rules of the game in the region. The portion of the Central Arctic Ocean outside of claimed territorial waters and exclusive economic zones is roughly the size of the Mediterranean Sea. Despite popular connotations of new Cold Wars and clashes in the Arctic, the region is home to long-standing maritime agreements, many treaties (including on search and rescue, and oil spill responses) negotiated between and among Arctic states, and is governed by the consensus-based Arctic Council. It is a zone in which the renewed tensions between Russia and the West are largely absent, and remains a region of international cooperation and coordination. Five Arctic Ocean coastal states have exclusive economic zones which extend out into various seas (the Greenland, Norwegian, Barents, Kara, Laptev, East Siberian, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas) above the Arctic Circle, which in turn form the Arctic Ocean. China has anointed itself as a near-Arctic State, viewing the Central Arctic Ocean as a global commons.

In contrast to the relative harmony and cooperation in the Arctic, the South China Sea is a hotbed of disagreement and competition. Encompassing over 3 million square kilometers, the South China Sea is subject to a range of overlapping claims over land features and jurisdictions, including sovereignty over islands and rocks, control of low-lying features such as reefs and shoals, the classification of land features, control of resources, and freedom of navigation. Contests over exclusive economic zones abound. Furthermore, China claims sovereign rights within the nine-dash line (approximately 90 percent of the South China Sea), a claim which was quashed by the ruling of 2016 South China Sea Arbitral Tribunal. Beijing has rejected and largely ignored that ruling. Sovereignty disputes concern the ownership of the hundreds of features dotting the sea, including islands, rocks, reefs, submerged shoals, and low-lying elevations, some or all of which are claimed by China, Taiwan, Philippines, Vietnam, and Malaysia. Sovereignty of these land features and their classification as islands, rocks, or low-lying elevations affect the rights to maritime resources, such as oil, gas, and fish. The above five states, plus Brunei and Indonesia, claim exclusive economic zones and continental shelf in the South China Sea beyond their mainland and archipelagic baselines. Under international law, these maritime zones entitle states to limited sovereign rights (i.e., to resources), rather than full sovereignty.

Strategic competition at sea has been at least partly driven by Chinas rising naval militarization. The South China Sea is considered a near sea and its geographic proximity to the mainland is central to the Chinas strategic imagination and threat perception. In addition to conventional concerns about territorial defense, the South China Sea is also important for China because of its nationalist claims to all of the tiny land features, and its desire to exploit resources such as oil, gas, and fish. This has also contributed to the growing militarization of the South China Sea. In addition, six of Chinas 10 largest ports can only be reached via this body of water.

These geographical differences render it too simplistic to extrapolate the geopolitics of the South China Sea to the Arctic. This is further illustrated by drilling down into the differences in the strategic trajectories in terms of the balance of power and international legal norms.

Balance of Power

Beginning in 2014, China engaged in rapid, large-scale militarization and artificial island-building in the South China Sea, raising alarm about its capacities and willingness to restrict navigation and exert sea control of this localized area. Despite pledging not to militarize the islands, China took advantage of the geographic isolation and limited surveillance of these remote features to build three large, mid-ocean airfields suitable for military aircraft in 2016. While some other claimant states also engaged in artificial island-building and militarization activities, China played a substantial role in militarizing the South China Sea, for example in emplacing anti-ship missiles and long-range surface-to-air missiles on artificial islands, contesting the transit of warships, and using maritime paramilitary forces for surveillance and intimidation of non-Chinese vessels. These activities have precipitated new concerns about Chinas intentions, including whether it wants to push the United States out of the first island chain.

These actions have precipitated concerns that China aims to revise and supplant or ignore maritime rules, with follow-on consequences for regional order more generally. They directly challenge U.S. naval supremacy in the region. Chinas actions threaten U.S. interests in freedom of navigation and undermine the global maritime order, which has enabled the U.S. Navy to project power and enforce free transit for decades.

By contrast, in the Arctic, balance-of-power realities and great-power politics are not new. The region is no stranger to geopolitical competition it was a crucial battleground during the Cold War, as it is the shortest distance for missiles to fly between the United States and Soviet Union. Further, the Arctic represented a key flank for NATO and strategically critical sea line of communication for wartime replenishment between Europe and North America. Since the Cold War, regional cooperation and U.S.-Russian ties have remained somewhat siloed from tensions beyond the Arctic. While new players and prizes have emerged in the Arctic great game, regional cooperation remains. Of course, the preexisting U.S.-Russian power balance in the Arctic is an important consideration when adding Beijing to the Arctic power mix. U.S. Arctic policy in recent years has been revived as part of a broader focus on renewed great-power competition. Under the Trump administration, there has been a litany of Arctic updates the Department of Defense, Air Force, and Coast Guard have all tabled new arctic strategies.

Increasingly, China is employing geoeconomics, rather than rapid militarization as seen in the South China Sea, to tilt the balance of power in the Arctic. Beijing uses campaigns targeted toward the Nordic states and within the resource sector to increase influence, legitimacy, and engagement in the Arctic region. Chinese economic engagement in Greenlands resource sector, as well as its growing (albeit ever so slightly) economic ties in Iceland and Norway, are illustrative of Chinas efforts to expand its role in the Arctic economy. Much of Chinas foreign investment in Arctic energy ventures is targeted at the Russian Arctic zone particularly the liquefied national gas projects on the Yamal Peninsula. However, Kremlin awareness of the potential debt-trap diplomacy Beijing undertakes has resulted in a unified Russian policy to curtail majority ownership by China of any Russian Arctic ventures.

Efforts in the South China Sea to increase cooperation such as code of conduct negotiations between China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or joint development plans are failing to develop robust cooperative mechanisms for the management or resolution of maritime and territorial disputes. In contrast, Washingtons balance-of-power considerations for the Arctic region tend to overstate the conflictual nature of the region which, unlike its Cold War predecessor, is an environment characterized by international cooperation. The U.S. interests are also different across the maritime theaters: In the South China Sea, the Americas primary interest has traditionally been cast as freedom of navigation and maintaining the capacity to maneuver within the first island chain, although recent diplomatic efforts have seen the United States provide more public support for the maritime rights of Southeast Asian claimant states. In the Arctic, U.S. interests are primarily territorial, as it is one of five Arctic Ocean coastal states. The Arctic is also a region through which Washington shares a border with Russia in the Bering Strait. Additionally, there are vast resource interests in the Alaskan Arctic sector, an indigenous population, and strategic basing interests for power projection into the North Atlantic, Arctic, and Pacific Oceans.

Hydrocarbon (oil and natural gas) resource exploitation is a clear driver of the South China Sea and Arctic great games. The Arctic is often touted, as per the U.S. Geological Survey, to hold an estimated 30 percent of the worlds remaining gas and 13% of its untapped oil reserves. Of course, the majority of these estimates fall within zones of the Arctic which are not disputed, clearly within delineated territories.

On the high seas of the Arctic Ocean, Chinese activity remains focused on scientific and research priorities, at least for now. China is party to the Central Arctic Ocean Fisheries Agreement, and while it is legally allowed to exploit the Central Arctic Ocean region, Beijing has continued to abide by the fisheries ban.

In the South China Sea, on the other hand, China has been aggressively attempting to deny Southeast Asian claimant states their legal entitlements to maritime resources under UNCLOS. One of the contemporary challenges posed in the South China Sea are the so-called gray zone tactics employed by Chinas paranaval forces to assert its claims to disputed land features and adjacent waters. Described as a cabbage strategy, Chinas maritime coast guard, fishing fleets, and maritime militia form layers of pressure that constitute its first line of maritime defense. Chinas proximity to the South China Sea allows it to use its growing number of maritime assets to implement its gray zone tactics to advance its claims. In contrast, Chinas naval capabilities are not yet advanced enough to project power in the more distant and complex Arctic high seas environment.

International Legal Norms

Distorting international legal norms is a central element of Chinas South China Sea approach. Although it has engaged in a lawfare strategy to support its territorial and maritime interests in the South China Sea, many of its pseudo-legal arguments are inconsistent with UNCLOS. Possibly the highest profile are Beijings claims to historic rights inside the nine-dash line, which would give China sovereignty over land features as well as sovereign rights to fishing, navigation, and exploration and exploitation of resources. This argument was rejected by an Arbitral Tribunal instituted under UNCLOS in 2016, which Beijing has refused to acknowledge as binding or legitimate.

The second ambit claim is Chinas Four Sha (four sands) strategy, which involves constructing straight archipelagic baselines around the island groups of the Pratas Islands, Paracel Islands, Spratly Islands, and Macclesfield Bank. Here, Beijing lawyers and academics have developed a new legal theory that the Four Sha are Chinas historical territorial waters and part of its exclusive economic zone and continental shelf, even though the offshore archipelagos do not conform with standards for drawing straight archipelagic baselines set out in Article 47 of UNCLOS, which states that the ratio of the area of the water to the area of the land must be between one to one and nine to one. In these South China Sea island groups, the water area is too large to meet these requirements. Nevertheless, the Four Sha theory indicates a desire to claim internal waters within such baselines, which, if successful, would entitle China to full sovereignty over the area rather than the limited sovereign rights afforded in other maritime zones such as the exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.

The third concerning element of Chinas lawfare strategy is the use of domestic law to justify double standards in implementing principles of freedom of navigation. For example, the U.S. interpretation that innocent passage includes warships without prior notification is not universally shared. Some legal scholars argue that the assertion of greater security rights at sea is a sign of creeping jurisdiction by coastal states . For example, Beijing asserts its right to regulate foreign military activities in its claimed exclusive economic zone, contrary to widespread understandings of UNCLOS provisions. Beijing has presented the South China Sea as a sui generis area subject to Chinese domestic law, rather than international law, which constitutes a form of jurisdictional exceptionalism.

Yet in the Arctic Ocean, Beijing has continued to adhere to the agreed international legal architecture, despite its increased footprint and interest in the region. Like the South China Sea, the international shipping routes emerging from the melting Arctic zone are eyed by Beijing as a key component of the Polar Silk Road aspect of their Belt and Road Initiative. For now, China looks to use the most viable Asia-to-Europe shipping passage the Northeast Passage. A large section of the Northeast Passage is Russias Northern Sea Route, an international waterway defined by Russian law.

In the Northern Sea Route, Russia has somewhat mimicked Chinas jurisdictional exceptionalism in the South China Sea. Russia argues that the Northern Sea Route constitutes straits used for internal navigation, and is thus not subject to all UNCLOS rights like innocent passage. Russias application of UNCLOS Article 234 (commonly known as the ice law) stipulates that states can enhance their sovereignty and control over an exclusive economic zone if the area is subject to ice coverage or grounds for intensified environmental management. Moscow has long applied this entirely legal approach and developed deeper jurisdictional exceptionalism in recent years. Russia has crafted domestic laws and implemented strategies for the management of the Northern Sea Route. Examples include laws requiring Russian pilotage of all vessels transiting through the Northern Sea Route, toll fees, and prior warning or indication of plans to use the route. The United States makes its own tantalizing jurisdictional exceptionalism effort by refusing to ratify UNCLOS while expecting others to conform to it.

In a broad sense, the three great powers across these maritime regions the United States, China, and Russia appeal to jurisdictional exceptionalism, but such great-power privileges are applied inconsistently according to geography and interests. Such exceptionalism has worrying implications for the capacities of global governance regimes to enforce global standards that apply to all states. China defends its jurisdictional exceptionalism in the South China Sea, yet is slowly starting to reject Russias application of the same exceptionalism and historical argument for its Arctic exclusive economic zone. This is particularly the case for the Northern Sea Route. Beijing is increasingly opting not to refer to the Northern Sea Route at all, speaking merely in terms of the Northeast Passage. While double standards are nothing new in international politics, it is interesting to witness the ways in which states pick and choose, manipulate, and artfully interpret international law to fit agendas.

Its Geography, Stupid

There are clear indicators of Chinese revisionism at sea extending beyond the South China Sea into the Arctic. Both regions are a portent for how agreed-upon international rules are applied in divergent ways across different settings toward diverse strategic outcomes. Lumping the Arctic and South China Sea into one basket as theaters hosting Chinese maritime revisionism, as if the exact same strategy is unleashed in all maritime strategy, clouds the reality of the two regions distinct strategic environments. A constant across both flashpoints is the significant role that geography plays.

Geographical proximity has allowed China to use the nine-dash line to justify an extension of its land boundaries out to sea. This is a form of mapped territorialization which is now even implicating popular culture and media. This is possible in large part due to the proximity of the South China Sea to mainland China. Russia has also used geographical proximity to bolster domestic narratives of Arctic greatness and to justify its Northern Sea Route exceptionalism. Chinas 2018 Arctic Strategy flagged Beijings near-Arctic identity and has cemented Beijings strategic interest in the region, yet it is unlikely that a mapped territorialization will result in the Arctic. Beijings lack of proximity to the Arctic is somewhat a revenge of geography that not only curtails Chinas ability to legitimize itself amongst Arctic-rim powers, but is also a constraining factor for any domestic public relations agenda in China.

Chinas Four Sha strategy is based on an assumption of sovereign ownership of contested land features in the South China Sea. Russia, too, bases its extended continental shelf claim on contested features of the Arctic. This claim is currently under consideration at the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf . The underwater ridge which Russia argues is an extension of the Siberian continental shelf extends up to the North Pole along the Arctic Ocean seabed. This ridge is also claimed by Denmark (by way of Greenland) and Canada. The three states will likely deliberate between themselves any extended exclusive economic zone claims, given that the commission is unable to award territory and merely rules on the scientific evidence presented. Contested land features are a hallmark of the current overlapping claims to the North Pole, but there is no avenue for China to tap into this particular contest of land features in the Arctic. There is, however, the potential for China to claim ice floes in the high seas region of the Arctic Ocean perhaps to even fortify or build its own floating feature in this region, climate change allowing. In reality, this is unlikely due to the sheer operational challenges, none the least periods of 24-hour darkness, and a harsh operational environment which makes no commercial sense nor provides any limited strategic pay-off to repeating its South China Sea approach in the Arctic.

Overall, the South China Sea and the Arctic are very different maritime regions with distinct geopolitical characteristics. China is clearly borrowing from the great-power exceptionalism playbook in the South China Sea. Yet while Beijing has articulated a clear strategic interest in the Arctic, a replication of its South China Sea play book in the Arctic is highly unlikely. Maritime exceptionalism in approaches to UNCLOS are localized and interest-based according to geography, rather than generalized and values-based seeking wholescale revision of the rules-based international order. This has implications for understanding challenges to multilateral governance of the global commons, particularly for how states seeking to preserve norm-based standards should calibrate their policies according to specific geographical regions, rather than relying upon a generic appeal to a rules-based order.

Elizabeth Buchanan is a lecturer of strategic studies at Deakin University delivering the Defence and Strategic Studies Course at the Australian War College. She is a fellow of the Modern War Institute at West Point and was previously a visiting maritime fellow at the NATO Defense College. Her book Red Arctic is forthcoming with The Brookings Press. She tweets at @BuchananLiz.

Bec Strating is the executive director of La Trobe Asia and asenior lecturer in the Department of Politics, Media and Philosophy at La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia. Her most recent monograph, Defending the Maritime Rules-based Order: Regional Responses to the South China Sea Disputes, was published by the East West Center in 2020. She tweets at @becstrating.

Image: U.S. Pacific Fleet (Photo by Lt. Michelle Pelissero)

Correction: A previous version of this article stated, Russia argues that the Northern Sea Route constitutes straits used for international navigation.' That was quoted incorrectly. Russia argues that straits are used for internal navigation. In addition, aprevious version of the article stated that Russias extended continental shelf claim pushes the Russian exclusive economic zone up to the North Pole. This is incorrect. Russia is seeking to extend its continental shelf, and if the claim is accepted, Russia would control mining rights of the seabed at the North Pole.

Read the original:

Why the Arctic is Not the 'Next' South China Sea - War on the Rocks

Through intensive labor market analysis and outreach to local businesses, the Promising Credentials project has identified 137 Promising Credentials that are associated with 274 in-demand, living-wage occupations throughout Hawaii.

Hawaii P20 Partnerships for Education, Chamber of Commerce Hawaii, Harold K.L. Castle Foundation and Kamehameha Schools have joined together on the Promising Credentials project, an initiative aimed at identifying high value certificates and credentials, as determined by industry, using Hawaii labor market data and local employer insights. Promising Credentials in Hawaii, a first-of-its-kind analysis for the state, looks at whether the credentials students can earn actually matter in the real world to local employers.

The project, which kicked off in March 2020, created a final report which includes the list of Promising Credentials, Promising Occupations and recommended actions. One-page Credential Resource Sheets for each of the individual credentials, as well as a searchable excel document of the Promising Credentials and Occupations in Hawaii, are also available that can then be used to inform school design, career and technical education programs of study, and career pathways.

Aligning education with labor market needs is more important now than ever, said Stephen Schatz, executive director of Hawaii P20. We have to ensure students earn credentials that lead to a career, and that enable them to live and thrive right here at home.

To gain insight and identify the promising occupations and credentials, 126 businesses participated in surveys and focus groups conducted by SMS Research, working with the national expert Education Strategy Group.

Having a list of credentials that are most valued by Hawaii employers is just the beginning, said Keala Peters, vice president of education and workforce development at the Chamber of Commerce Hawaii. The next phase of work will require a committed partnership between K12, postsecondary, workforce development and industry leaders to take action that leads to more students earning these valued credentials.

In tandem with the Promising Credentials initiative, a Talent Roadmap to Support Economic Recovery in Hawaii has been developed which arms leaders with data and insights to hone in on industries, strategies and credentials that will enable Hawaii to fill its jobs with local, highly skilled workers for a more resilient economy.

Launched by the Hawaii Executive Collaborative, Jobs for the Future, Hawaii Community Foundation, Harold K.L. Castle Foundation, Chamber of Commerce Hawaii, Strada Education Network and Hawaii P-20, this talent road map highlights three strategic opportunities that the state should invest and scale in to build a lasting future for all of Hawaiis residents: expand work-based learning, rapidly re-skill and credential, and grow sector-based strategies.

The Promising Credentials in Hawaii report and other resources are available on the Hawaii Career Pathways website.

More:

Identifying Promising Credentials that matter in Hawaii - UH System Current News

Five years ago where the Atlantic Ocean and the Caribbean Sea meet is the small South American country of Guyana an offshore oil exploration struck black gold. At the time, it was estimated that ExxonMobil alone could extract 8 billion barrels of oil from the oil field discovered about 120 miles off Guyanas coast.

It was one of the largest fossil fuel discoveries of modern times.

Since then, ExxonMobil, which is at the forefront of the project, has found 17 more locations in whats known as the Stabroek Block. Stabroek is the old name the Dutch used for Guyanas capital before it was renamed Georgetown by the British.

To date, the discoveries in the entire Guyana-Suriname basin now include 13.6 billion barrels of oil and 32 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. More than a dozen entities have partnered with ExxonMobil, and the Guyanese government has received assistance from the World Bank for the project. The environmental risks are significant, though.

Mongabay caught up with the team at Germany-based international environmental and human rights non-profit Urgewald and asked their collaborator, freelance filmmaker Shane Thomas McMillan about the 45-minute film, his role as director and editor, Guyanas future in oil, and what lies ahead.

Mongabay (MB): What was surprisingly the most difficult part about putting this documentary together?

Shane Thomas McMillan (STM): When we began this project, the film that we envisioned had a lot to do with traveling to meet a few incredible people and learn about their work and their ideas in charting an alternative path for Guyana. It was really imagined as a journey and to produce that we had about three different productions trips envisioned, but we only got to complete the first of them.

On that trip, we sent our team to Guyana to meet local activists, conservationists and political experts. The idea was to get an understanding of the landscape there, make first connections, and maybe follow up with another trip towards the end of the production. Our team worked for almost two weeks and was meant to carry out some interviews in Trinidad and Tobago to cover the regional aspects of the story, when a global epidemic struck. Some even came close to not making it home due to the travel restrictions that were being imposed in the first days of the worldwide outbreak. Beyond being a terrible development for everyone on the planet, it was a big problem for our film.

Having to change the way we made the film called a lot into question. Rethinking our approach, we decided to broaden the scope of the film and also tell a larger story about the processes that are at play in the country, and what the World Bank and its partner institutions are doing to bring them into play. This opened our eyes to a different set of potential experts for the film and gave us, I think, a bit more freedom to try out a different way of telling the story. Thanks to the wonderful contributions of archives and partner organizations, we were able to build what our protagonist Luke would call a much wider view of the story and hopefully gives the viewer a better feeling for the institution that we have placed under the microscope in this film.

MB: Are there any challenges that stick out?

STM: Doing a film about an institution that is so large, complex, powerful and intransparent is really not easy. Considering that they are a bank, it is really hard to find aggregate numbers about their work, a hole that our expert Heike Mainhardt was able to fill. And because the Bank has so much influence, it is honestly hard to get even the bravest people to share everything they know about it.

In a similar vein, the fight against oil, especially in Guyana itself, is very dangerous. People like Melinda Janki very much put their lives on the line for the things they believe in. This is why we had to stay on solid ground in our storytelling and did our bestto not endanger our collaborators in the production of the film.

MB: What aspects of local politics did your team find at play?

STM: To be perfectly honest, it was very important to me to focus the film on the World Bank and stay out of Guyanese political affairs to the best of my ability. This film is targeted at a global audience and as a journalist myself, I think it is important to leave current Guyanese politics to the journalists working in the country.

That said, politics are an unavoidable aspect of life and filmmaking. And our experience with local politics is best summed up in the film by a quote in the film from Patrick Chesney, who essentially says that Guyana has had political instability for too long, especially in regards to its electoral process. Our team arrived in Guyana a few days after the election that followed the long-delayed re-election process as a result of a vote of no confidence in 2018. There were street protests and our teams rental car was struck by a stray bullet. Months later, the results of that election had still not been released, as the outgoing government was unwilling to accept the results.

All of our interviews pointed to a future in which oil and gas development in the country has the potential to make that instability in the country even worse.

MB: How do you see this issue playing out regionally?

STM: There are obviously many political aspects to this situation that I think are hard to calculate, but I would much rather focus on the environmental situation in the region. In short, as Percy Hintzen put it in the documentary: Guyana is solving Exxons problems, but Exxon is not solving Guyanas problems.

Guyana is a member of the Caribbean community. In the very likely scenario that there is an oil spill, the country thanks to the contracts with Exxon is responsible for the cleanup. This would be a disaster not only for the country itself and its wealth of endangered marine species, but for its neighbors and its relationships with them. The Caribbean is highly dependent on fishing and tourism, and it does not take much to imagine what will happen in the case of a spill. All of this, keep in mind, with a company that has had major spills in its past, and using dangerous, ultra-deep drilling techniques on this project. There is also the very real issue of sea-level rise, which will certainly have a huge effect on Guyana and its neighbors.

MB: What about on land?

STM: Looking on land, Guyana lies at the heart of an ecological region that it shares with its neighbors called the Guiana Shield. This area contains one of the last intact rainforests on the planet, the country is over 80% forested. As our collaborator Luke Johnson says in the film, last year the country was voted the number one ecotourism destination in the world, the country is a carbon sink, and it provides some of the last pristine habitat to many keystone biodiversity species.

MB: How does this project stack up to other things youve worked on in your career?

STM: Having traveled to over twenty countries as an environmental filmmaker, I can say that this oil discovery puts Guyana on a path that will likely put all of that natural wealth at risk. In a lot of other countries around the world the kind of transformation that the Guyanese economy is currently undertaking has led to a totally different relationship with the natural world: more mining, more logging, more roads, more consumption. As our expert Percy Hintzen points out in the film, this pattern of intensification of extraction is something that was long fueled by colonization, but countries like Guyana never really profited from it.

And now, we continue to see this pattern around the planet in basically every country that has followed the path that Guyana is beginning to walk down. The World Bank makes the argument that Guyana can spend some of the profits from oil to protect this natural wealth, but it seems rather cynical to encourage a nation to destroy its environment in order to generate funds to protect it? It should also be noted that the World Bank itself has warned that Guyana is one of the countries that will be most affected by global sea-level rise.

MB: Guyana has managed to do well in some aspects with managing their forestry concessions. Do you see any aspects of that more holistic approach in the oil arena?

STM: It doesnt make it into the film, but in his interview our expert Patrick Chesney said that almost all of the ideas and policies surrounding oil exploration and extraction have been flown in from the outside. You only need to look at the contract the government signed with Exxon to see proof of this. The contract was written in such a way that Guyana will see little revenue until Exxon has covered the cost of all its wells and the company is barely paying any taxes on the oil. Then just looking at the practical elements of the project: Why are so many of the contractors working on the project not from Guyana? Who is paying their salaries and why is that money not staying in the country?

MB: Why is oil still being exploited on such a massive scale at this point in history, given the already existing massive environmental issues globally?

STM: Industry experts point to Guyanas oil as a classic smash and grab approach to resource extraction: companies will come, get what they can for as cheap as they can, and get out of Dodge. All of this simply points to how little everyday Guyanese people have been able to shape the approach being taken with oil development in their country.

Contrast that to Guyanas approach to its forests. The premise of that work, simply by virtue of what it is trying to accomplish, is based on building and maintaining natural resources over generations. In this approach one really sees the value of local expertise, Guyanese-led research, and democratic decision-making processes. This is a path that by its nature employs more Guyanese people and does so in kinds of work that are more deeply connected to the health of the environment.

But coming back to the bank, despite Guyanas own plans to develop along a green path, the bank has never invested in renewable energy in the country. So, no, I dont see anything even close to the holistic approaches embodied in Guyanas approach to its forests anywhere in its approach to oil and gas development.

MB: Who are the individual actors who have proven to be most significant in this story?

STM: I think the most important person in this story is the environmental lawyer Melinda Janki. Melinda is an incredibly hard-working and powerful advocate for the people of Guyana and for our planet. Her organization Fair Deal for Guyana Fair Deal for the Planet is working very hard in the Guyanese courts to preserve and utilize the environmental protections that the oil and gas industrys lawyers have not yet been able to tear up. The work of those industry lawyers in undoing Guyanese environmental protections was, by the way, paid for by the World Bank.

Other important voices in the film are conversationalists Luke Johnson and Annette Arjoon-Martins. We also had great expert interviews with Patrick Chesney from the Guiana Shield Facility, Associate Professor from University of California, Merced Tracey Osborne, and professor Percy Hintzen from Florida International University, who provided us with a lot of context in the film. We also talked to the former auditor general of Guyana, Anand Goolsarran, who gave very important insights into the countrys contract with ExxonMobil and its impacts on the planet.

MB: What are you seeing from outside actors including foreign governments?

STM: I think there is an important point about how decisions about projects are voted on by other nation states. The World Bank functions like a bank, but the decisions as to which countries get money for what purposes are basically global political decisions when it comes down to it, but ones that are very much focused around U.S. foreign policy. The president of the bank is appointed by the president of the United States and the bank strongly advocates for American interests in the world, the U.S. being the biggest funder of the bank.

Each member state does have a vote on projects, but as you can imagine, voting against the interests of other member nations has political ramifications, so it is actually very hard for countries to vote against projects. In most cases, even if a representative strongly opposes a project they will often simply abstain from voting.

This is something about the bank that almost nobody knows and is very problematic as it pertains to oil and gas development. For as long as it is in the interest of wealthy countries with oil companies to support those countries in their efforts, and for as long as the World Bank is willing to fund this sector of the economy, countries will put forth projects that further damage our climate. And other countries will basically be forced to go along with it.

MB: How are power dynamics an issue here?

STM: There is a deep imbalance in how power flows through the bank. A perfect example of this is how pressure to support oil and gas projects has even come from U.S. Senators in recent years, who are looking to bolster the interests of companies from their home states. On the flip side, there is little evidence that the entire populations of countries where such projects will be implemented have even close to as much of a say as those senators in the matter.

Looking beyond the bank, it is also interesting to watch how the Trump administration is inserting itself into this situation. Just recently, Mike Pompeo made history as the first sitting U.S. Secretary of State to visit Guyana and its neighbor Suriname, saying how important it was to have the US private sector involved in Guyanas oil extraction. Many administration officials including Assistant Secretary to the Bureau of Energy Resources, Francis R. Fannon have been major advocates of further U.S. involvement in the region. This very resource-based interest by the U.S. government has a long, dark history in many countries in South and Central America; one that is beginning to repeat, this time in Guyana.

MB: Is there anything concerning about the implications of this oil?

STM: Everything about the implications of this oil is concerning. Melinda Janki sums it up by stating that oil is too expensive for Guyana and that the country is already paying the price in terms of its rule of law and democracy being undermined. She also stressed that what is at stake will not just affect the country itself, but the entire region and the global climate. Melinda Janki says the massive amounts of oil and gas big oil hopes to be able to drill off the coast of Guyana would destroy global efforts to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees.

Janki also explains that Guyana has the longest mud-coastline in the world, which makes up an immensely special ecosystem and habitat for species local scientists have just begun to understand. An oil spill could destroy all of that. As the Guyanese conservationist Annette Arjoon-Martins points out in the film, Guyana is not prepared for an oil spill. In fact, none of us are.

MB: As a filmmaker, how did your background play into this project?

STM: I grew up in the U.S., in Montana. It is a place known for its incredible natural beauty, but what most people dont know is that it was also left devastated by the extractive industry just a few decades ago. From its early history into the post-war era it was known for its huge reserves of copper, gold and silver; but now, half a century after the mining companies moved out, it still houses some of the largest remediation sites on the planet. I grew up in the midst of the economic hardship and environmental cleanup that followed this massive extraction, and it plays large in my mind when I watch as others navigate the very complex questions that resources pose.

In this case, Guyana is not being helped by global institutions like the World Bank and its international partners like the United States in being pressured to bet on oil. And with the oil industry in long-term decline it is an ill-advised bet. As our expert Kathy Hipple says in the film, the profitability of the oil and gas sector has been in decline for years and investment in it, by any country, is to throw away money, time and effort better spent on the transition to renewable energy.

But even looking at the more concrete effects: the very one-sided contract, the lack of transparency by the government and the projects investors, the detrimental environmental effects, and the terrible effects on Guyanas democratic processes, all of this is very, very concerning.

MB: Are extractive projects just outdated?

STM: The problem is really deep, it lies in the extractive nature of our very economic system. We need more than just a foundational structure for our transfer of goods, also defines the way that we place value on the planet and each other. It determines our willingness to place natural systems in danger for our own short-term economic growth, and our willingness to subjugate our democratic and humanitarian values in exchange for personal wealth.

Seen that way, it seems clear that the planet is calling on us to find a better path; to choose regeneration over extraction. And we hope those who watch the film will come to agree.

Learn more about Urgewald and watch the full 47-minute documentary here.

Banner image: Guyana lies at the heart of the Guiana Shield, one of the most biodiverse regions on the planet. Tom Vierus / Urgewald.

Here is the original post:

Guyana's future and challenges in oil: Q&A with filmmaker Shane Thomas McMillan - Mongabay.com

Question from Allison D. Craig, I work in human resources at a 200+ employee human services organization. Our CEO has had to reduce our training and development budget this year and I do not anticipate an improvement in 2021. I am worried about retaining our best employees because I know from experience, our turnover increases when we do not develop our employees. Can you give me any advice on what I can tell our CEO to make training a higher spending priority? Thanks, Allison.

Allison, thanks for asking this question. Developing people is a subject near and dear to me and was a priority in my hospital days. I have seen several of the employers I work with reduce training and development (T&D) budgets significantly. Looking at the bigger picture, we both need to understand that the survival of many employers in New Orleans is a very real issue. You and I both need to be realistic about that reality. What worries me most are the companies that continue to keep a tight hold on T&D funds, even when their profits have recovered sufficiently, such that mere survival is no longer an issue. I hope your company has moved past those difficult daily survival decisions.

Juengling

I recently attended the New Orleans Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) annual conference and had a chance to listen to the national SHRM President Johnny Taylor, Jr. speak to these very issues. While I have some thoughts to add, he brings us insights to this challenge from a national perspective. Here are the three critical points he made:

We are a knowledge-based economy. When you think about this, he is right; the vast majority of jobs today (and certainly those of tomorrow) require continuous learning, not physical strength. The constant need for learning new concepts is critical for production of manufactured goods or developing the technology and software needed in a competitive environment. The delivery of your programs and services is no exception. I also believe one of the trends of the pandemic will be on-shoring of the manufacturing sent overseas in the past two decades, as well as the emergence of industries to address renewable resources and global climate change. T&D is and will be crucial to thrive in this new world.

The war for top talent never ceases. The megatrends are undeniable: declining birth rates, aging of the workforce, and an expanding economy (after the pandemic recovery). The second most important driver of employee engagement, whereby your employees give valuable discretionary efforts, is the fact people want to be developed to achieve greater contributions, more responsibilities, and professional growth. Over the coming decade, the labor force will shrink in most developed countries and T&D has been proven to retain top talent.

The skills gap of managers and leaders is (still) huge. The data still supports this fact: people leave companies because of their boss over 60% of the time. Another reality: over 50% of employee problems are a result of poor management that leads to poor operating results. If company leadership took more time developing managers and emerging leaders, you would have a better bottom line and better employee retention. The cost of hiring top talent will continue to go up, but you can proactively address the problem by training up your managers and leaders.

I want to add these two other thoughts to Mr. Taylors comments:

Build your business case. You can and must determine the cost of turnover, hiring, and lost time due to poor management and leadership. Estimates of the cost of hiring new leaders is still between 15 to 35% of their annual salary (recruiting fees, relocation, lost productivity, etc.). SHRM estimates it costs over $4,000 to hire every new line employee. So after you add up the turnover costs, it justifies the need for a reasonable development budget and program for managers and leaders.

Find an executive sponsor. Even if you are the head of HR at your organization, find a C-level executive sponsor who agrees with the necessity to develop your employees. Work with them to build your business case and then persuade the members of the leadership team of the necessity to think long term. T&D is a strategic imperative where you invest in people. Leaders who see T&D as a line item expense to be minimized will not see their companies recover quickly when better times return.

Allison, I hope this helps and I want to leave you with a final thought: There is a famous Richard Branson quote that he penned in 2014 that goes, Train people well enough so they can leave, treat them well enough, so they dont want to. The statement from the founder of Virgin Atlantic carries a lot of meaning, and it should undoubtedly be the driving force of every manager, leader, executive and business owner.

Craig S. Juengling, PCC, is a credentialed executive coach who spent 22 years running hospitals and health care systems and maintains a private executive coaching practice in New Orleans. Visit http://www.neworleansexecutivecoach.com for additional information, or email Craig at JuenglingC@juengling.us.

Read the original here:

Ask the Executive Coach: Putting priority on training employees - New Orleans CityBusiness