13 "i'm more human now."

By now, I'm sure the world is familiar with the story of the 33 Chilean miners that were trapped under a mountain, 700 meters below ground. The blinding darkness that they had to live in for 69 days cannot be imagined by many, nor can the mental disruption these men went through be understood even by psychologists. However, the theatrical rescue of these men last week made the entire world forget about these "side effects" of being trapped underground, living in a literal limbo. The president of Chile was quick to praise the efficiency of the technology that went into making the capsule that would eventually pull these men up to the surface. (He was also quick to hug each man as they ascended, oftentimes jumping in front of their wives.) The irony of his praise lays in the fact that mining technology still leaves miners with the sense of insecurity. The working conditions in the mines worldwide are despicable and inhumane in every sense of the word. But yet, a capsule, which is soon to be paraded around the country like a war hero, was able to be made and sent to the bowels of the mine in less than two months. Obviously this technology needs to be placed in improving mining technology and helping these poor men work in safer conditions.

BBC interviewed one the miners - Edison Pena, known as "the runner" among friends. He gave a disturbing interview and one of his statements really stuck out. It didn't have to do with the conditions (although he mentions those), or the dark (although he was obviously affected by that), but the hunger. He talks about the hunger that he felt during the first couple days living in mining purgatory.

BBC writes: It is clear that the intense hunger he felt during those first fateful days - his ribs protrude from his chest - is what haunts him the most.

"I think from now on, no food will be wasted in my house. I want to give a big message concerning world hunger. I never thought of giving an interview, but now I think God was protecting us, he was protecting me, and humbly I wouldn't like to let a single grain of rice go to waste at home, because that's what I felt, the hunger, and to go over that again is too strong for me...

It's really hard to come back from death, it's very hard. Now I just want to live, I want to live."

"Do you have any idea of how it is to live in the darkness?"

12 "the hungry tide."

The following are just some thoughts I posted on my class discussion board after reading The Hungry Tide by Amitav Ghosh. I know that you may not understand the specific references to the book, but I think the issue of Human vs Nature is one that everyone can get a feeling for.

Having read this book before without the lens of environmental issues, I have to say that the second read meant a lot more. The first time I read it, I was so enthralled by the love story that I found myself skipping the chapters narrating Nirmal’s experience with the island issues of Morichjhãpi. This time around I would actually skip the Piya and Fokir story to hear more about the people that seemed to be doomed to be evicted. There was one point that grabbed my attention, because it’s something that I grapple with all the time. Kusum tries to explain to Nirmal what it was like during the siege, that the police were yelling that their lives were worthless. In her words,

“ ’This island has to be saved for its trees, it has to be saved for its animals, it is a part of a reserve forest, it belongs to a project to save tigers, which is paid for by people all around the world.’ … Who are these people, I wondered, who love animals so much that they are willing to kill us for them? Do they know what is being done in their name? … As I thought of these things, it seemed to me that this whole world had become a place of animals, and our fault, our crime, was that we were just human beings, trying to live as human beings always have, from the water and the soil,” (p 216-217).

Since I started this program, I’ve had to think a lot about this human-nature paradigm. Who or what is more important? Are we willing to kill humans in order to save nature? It seems to me that there are people who value nature more than human lives, I’ve met some before in fact, but I’ve come to the realization that I’m not one of those people. The entire time I was reading the book I was rooting for the humans. Human vs. tiger: I’m not really sure I care if the tiger goes hungry. Human vs. jhor: I actually started to tear up when I remembered what happened to Fokir. I’ve put a lot of effort into helping people in my life, and while I understand the importance of conserving nature and living in harmony with nature, I still have a feeling that people are always going to come first for me. I want my career to be centered around educating people on how to live sustainably off their land, but if it comes down to using fertilizers to produce more food or someone going hungry, I know that I can’t live with myself if I were to choose the second option. I’ve decided that I’m going to invent/develop the second Green Revolution. That’s my new career dream. Find a way to increase yields all over the world while doing it in a sustainable way. People need to eat and nature needs to be taken care of – it is, after all, a quite vulnerable thing – and that’s the balance I’d like to find in this world. And this book solidified my feelings on the subject.

11 "hunger is not just about food."

So, I think I know what I want my career/life-long title to be: The Mother of the Second Green Revolution. Yes, that will do. Maybe throw in a Nobel Prize or something. That's always been a goal of mine...

The following is a blog post by Brian Halwail of the Worldwatch Institute. Not extremely ground-breaking, but shows the importance of agricultural investment - my #1 in ending world hunger.

"Hunger is not just about food, according to two UN voices"

May 11, 2009

"This past week, two thoughtful voices from the United Nations suggested a new direction for global efforts to eliminate hunger. While both offered their own specific policy advice -- advocating the need to eliminate subsidies in wealthy nations and invest in agricultural research internationally -- they shared the opinion that producing more crops must go hand in hand with improving the incomes of those who are hungry.

Most of the world's poor, roughly a billion people worldwide, live in rural area and depend partly or entirely on agriculture for their livelihoods. So increasing food production can help to boost farmers incomes, but it's not the only thing that can.

"Increasing agricultural production must go hand in hand with increasing the incomes of the poorest, particularly small-scale farmers," said Olivier De Schutter, the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food. According to UN Wire, he called a form of sustainable development that was "more about how to help the world feed itself" than "how to feed the world."

Earlier in the week, in remarks to open the 17th session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development, Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro pointed the delegations' attention to Africa and seconded earlier calls for what some have dubbed a Doubly Green Revolution -- raising yields and rebuilding agroecosystems. "In contrast to the original Green Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, which largely bypassed Africa, this must be a sustainable green revolution," Migiro said. She emphasized farming practices that use diverse cropping systems and ecological conditions to preserve biodiversity, while also raising yields.

Part of the revolution in thinking is that there isn't any one technology or quick fix that will worked in all cases. At least the world's farmers and agricultural researchers haven't found one yet. There are innovations that can be harnessed in some fields that won't work in other. And in some cases, an improved seed or crop rotation will only be most effective when farmers use it in conjunction with improvements in irrigation, or investment in processing crops for market, or changes in land ownership that make it easier for farmers to buy and invest in land.

In other words, the Doubly Green Revolution might benefit from the addition of an economic limb, including the need to guarantee Africa farmers equitable access to markets for their products. "Trade distortions that discourage agricultural investment in developing countries need to be phased out," Migiro said. "An African Green Revolution must empower farmers, particularly smallholders, both women and men.""

So you see folks, sustainable agriculture is where it's at. I knew I made a good decision somewhere in my life :)

10 "and on a more personal note..."

Well, I knew the day would come when I was so bogged down in grad school stuff that my blog post would have to be a little less academic. So here comes a personal update post, if you're interested :)

Who knew that my brain could fit this much information in such a short amount of time? Every day when I walk into my Environmental Politics class, the first thing that my professor says is that what we are learning in one class what usually takes a whole semester to learn and fully understand. But why hold fast to norms?! We're grad students! We're paying ungodly amounts of money to learn, so by gosh we shall learn!

Not saying that I'm not enjoying myself, because I sure am. I feel immensely more intelligent and can have a true debate in some of my classes, even if I end up playing Devil's Advocate. My scientific mind still can't grasp the lovey-dovey, mushy, utopianism that many of my fellow students believe so whole-heartedly in (nothing wrong with it, just not my style). Isn't it my job to share my experiences and knowledge so that others can learn as much as possible? I'm not going to sit by while she-who-shall-not-be-named (no, not Voldemort's wife) goes on about how terrible the Green Revolution was for our world and how hybrids cause soil erosion. Because that's just flat out wrong. But enough of my ranting, which is obviously aimed toward one individual in this case. I find myself meshing beautifully with the majority of my classmates and especially with my program-mates who are South-of-the-border bound with me. Which brings me to my next point.

This semester is such a tease. It's the beginning of October (aka three more months until January can start) and I'm already knee-deep in finding housing in Costa Rica, a one-way plane ticket, and registering for my first class ("Hunger, famine, and food security," perfect, I know). But every single day I have to think about the mounds of reading that's due in less than one week, in the policy brief that I haven't started, in the grant proposal that's not really real but it is at the same time. I can't focus on Costa Rica like I wish I could without losing focus on the things that I need to focus on. It's completely unfair and it's getting me down.

However, my luck is looking up. My mom and brother are coming to visit in one week, and we have tours of the Pentagon and the White House arranged. On top of them coming into town, the Park class of 2013 has their Learning Lab II trip as well. I get to do Marrakesh Part Deux, which won't disappoint I'm sure. And then on top of all of that, I'm 99% sure that my mom and I are going to Portugal for a week in November. So maybe even if I have to kill myself this semester, there are things that keep me going. Especially the thought of a year in Costa Rica. I can taste the chicharron and Imperial now...