Fwd: The conservation of donors
- Thought Foundation members might be interested in this report by
Conservation International (the "Hotspots" people). I suppose these
issues look a bit different when you have annual revenues of over
$220 million and assets of nearly $300 million, but even we little
guys are hurting . . .
>Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 10:09:20 -0500--
>To: Caribbean Biodiversity <email@example.com>
>From: Potter at Island Resources <bpotter@...>
>Subject: Fwd: The conservation of donors
>[So that's what happened! . . . bp]
>>Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 20:33:36 -0800
>>From: "Kaimowitz, David (CIFOR)" <d.kaimowitz@...>
>>Subject: The conservation of donors
>>To: "POLEX (LISTSERV)" <POLEX@...>
>>Cc: "Neubauer, Ingrid (CI)" <I.NEUBAUER@...>,
>> "Lapham, Nicholas (CI)" <N.LAPHAM@...>,
>> "Livermore, Rebecca (CI)" <R.LIVERMORE@...>
>>POLEX: CIFOR's Forest Policy Expert Listserver
>>Fast and effective policy alerts
>>The conservation of donors
>>Many developing countries get most of their biodiversity money from
>>international agencies and foreign governments. For example, LATIN
>>AMERICA GOT 90% OF ALL ITS BIODIVERSITY FUNDS FROM SUCH DONORS
>>BETWEEN 1990 AND 1997. So it makes sense to follow what the donors
>>are up to.
>>'Striking a Balance, Ensuring Conservation's Place on the
>>International Biodiversity Assistance Agenda', by Nicholas Lapham
>>and Rebecca Livermore from Conservation International, does just
>>that. It focuses on the agencies that give the most for
>>biodiversity - World Bank, Global Environment Facility (GEF),
>>European Commission, United States, Netherlands, Germany, France,
>>United Kingdom, and Japan.
>>According to Lapham and Livermore, DONORS SEEM LESS INTERESTED IN
>>BIODIVERSITY these days. In several agencies the topic has a lower
>>profile than it used to. British, German, and Japanese spending on
>>biodiversity peaked in the late 1990s and then declined. EMBASSIES
>>AND COUNTRY OFFICES MAKE MANY DECISIONS THAT HOME OFFICES USED TO
>>MAKE AND ARE NOT AS INCLINED TO FUND THE ENVIRONMENT.
>>Donors say they want to mainstream concerns about biodiversity
>>within their broader efforts, but have only partially succeeded.
>>They are funding more projects that focus on biodiversity in
>>agricultural and forestry systems. But most country assistance and
>>poverty reduction strategies still give only LIP SERVICE to
>>Donors are talking more about using biodiversity projects to reduce
>>poverty. That usually implies getting people to use their resources
>>sustainably, rather than simply keeping them away.
>>All this means less money for traditional park projects. The
>>BRITISH AND DUTCH in particular have both become INCREASINGLY
>>CRITICAL OF PURE CONSERVATION EFFORTS, which leave people out.
>>After spending almost one billion dollars on protected areas
>>between 1991 and 2001, the newest phase of GEF funding will
>>concentrate more on PROJECTS OUTSIDE PARKS. Germany and the United
>>States are practically the only bilateral donors that still spend
>>large sums on traditional park projects.
>>Which donor trends are good and bad depends on your perspective,
>>and Lapham and Livermore probably have more faith in traditional
>>park projects than I do. Still, one thing we all can agree on is
>>that we won't solve the problems by running away from them. To
>>conserve plants and animals we need to conserve the donors'
>>interest, and this report gives some useful insights into that.
>>To request a free electronic copy of this paper in PDF format you
>>can write Ingrid Neubauer at
>>To send comments or queries to the authors you can write Nicholas
>>Rebecca Livermore at
>>The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) established
>>the (CIFOR-POLEX) electronic listserver in July 1997 as a free
>>information service to the global forest community. Previous CIFOR
>>POLEX messages can be found at the CIFOR website:
>>If you would like to receive CIFOR-POLEX in English, Spanish,
>>French, Bahasa Indonesia, or Nihon-go (Japanese), send a message to
>>Ketty Kustiyawati at
>>If you would like to terminate your subscription to the CIFOR-POLEX
>>mailing list, send a message to
>><mailto:LISTSERV@...>LISTSERV@... containing the
>>message: UNSUBSCRIBE POLEX or contact Ketty Kustiyawati at
> Island Resources, 1718 "P" St NW # T-4, Washington, DC 20036
>Fone 202/265-9712 fax 202/232-0748; E-mail: <bpotter@...>
> EPA Environmental Quality Award Winner for 2003!
> Moderators of 25 e-mail discussion lists for Caribbean Environmentalists
Island Resources, 1718 "P" St NW # T-4, Washington, DC 20036
Fone 202/265-9712 fax 202/232-0748; E-mail: <bpotter@...>
EPA Environmental Quality Award Winner for 2003!
Moderators of 25 e-mail discussion lists for Caribbean Environmentalists