by Natalie Suckall
The role of the private sector in enhancing community adaptation was one of the big questions to emerge during the 9th International Conference on Community-Based Adaptation in Nairobi, Kenya.
During four days of discussion and debate we heard from researchers, practitioners and community members who welcome private sector involvement in adaptation and development … and we heard from those who questioned the morality of profit-making organisations benefiting from the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people.
Amongst the stories of success, Salaton Ole Ntutu and Stephen Ole Kisotu, representatives of Kenya’s Massai community, praised M-Pesa, the country’s mobile-phone money transfer and micro-financing service, which they use to buy cows and send money to remote friends and family. Since the launch of M-Pesa in 2007, over 13 billion Euro has been transferred across the network. For many Massai, the service has been life changing. It has put an end to expensive and time consuming bus journeys to physically deliver money and it has increased business productivity. Both are important aspects of adaptation. Speed of transfer means that during events such as drought money can be sent to family in an instant. And increased business productivity enables a household to invest in resilience enhancing activities, such as education and health.
We also heard from Jason Spensley from the UNFCCC’s Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN) who highlighted CTCN’s involvement in attracting private sector investment in crop drying practices in Mali where post-harvest loss is likely to be increased by climate change. For Jason Spensley, the take home message is that if the private sector can make profit in the face of climate change, investment will be forthcoming.
But how do we know that investment will lead to successful adaptation? And what about the broader moral question; is it right that profit making companies benefit from poverty?
The first question is perhaps a little easier to answer. Simply, we can never be sure a new investment will lead to success. But as Salameel Huq (IIED/BCAS) pointed out, during a session on enhancing the effectiveness of adaptation, perhaps this doesn’t matter. In fact, perhaps we should seek failure in order to understand what works, and more importantly, what doesn’t work. This point was echoed by Clare Shakya, from the UK’s Department for International Development, where failure is now discussed in a more transparent and constructive way than has previously been the norm, and where high-risk entrepreneurial adaptation initiatives are encouraged.
The second question is more difficult to answer; is it right to make money from poverty? The exploitation of vulnerable farming communities is not new and even in the context of learning from failure, few would suggest we actively follow strategies that we know will lead to mal-adaptation and increased vulnerability. Perhaps though, instead of viewing the private sector as being solely motivated by greed, it is possible to envisage a more nuanced situation; one where both farmer and business gain from a partnership.
For example, Suresh Patel from the Kenya Private Sector Alliance explained how local farmers’ poor understanding of economics of production and agricultural markets resulted in the small-holders he works with selling their cassava for less than it cost to produce. Conversely, the same farmers expected local buyers to purchase baobab fruit at vastly inflated prices. The buyers refused and the fruit remains unsold and uneaten.
But if farmers had some understanding of business, as well as access to real-time crop prices, they may be more likely to expect and achieve favourable rates. M-Farm, a Kenyan organisation, is a ‘transparency tool’ that links farmers to buyers and provides information on current market trends. Sellers download an app, or send an SMS, to receive the latest crop prices. The technology can’t prevent the kind of fluctuations in crop prices that climate variability creates. But it can help farmers remain one step ahead.
Even the most laudable private sector initiatives are, at least in part, driven by self-interest and the drive for profit. Arguably, these qualities are an unavoidable part of the human condition. We cannot avoid them, but we can regulate them. For example, a text based phone service that charges customers excessive prices to receive information is exploitative. Rules around maximum charges could prevent this.
There is great potential for the private sector to offer innovative solutions to development and adaptation challenges. However, regulation is necessary if the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people are to benefit in an accessible and equitable manner.
Kalpana Mandal, in her sixties, stood outside her tiny hut in Mousuni, a sinking island in the Sunderbans, with a long fishing net in her hand. All the land around her has been submerged, and hers is the last house standing. In a desperate attempt to save her humble abode from being washed away, Kalpana has covered most of her hut with the fishing net which she fastened at various points on the ground. But there is little hope of her dwelling being spared by the inexorable rising tide.
A crucial element of DECCMA has been the establishment of post graduate research groups across the project partners with a substantial and vibrant group based here at the University of Southampton. The School of Geography and the Environment, with the support of other faculties hosts 6 of these students and will be holding a Seminar Series which profile their work in examining how people are adapting to the physical effects of climate change, such as sea level rise, alongside socio-economic pressures, including land degradation and population pressure, in delta regions. The aim of this series is to showcase DECCMA and the cross-faculty conceptual research groups on deltas, and to give an opportunity for the PhD associates to present their work.
In March 2015 BC3 hosted the following training for the DECCMA project: