As the global climate conference in Bali has ended it may be the right time to take stock. When the so-called 'developed nations' transformed their societies from agricultural towards industrial economies, little was known about environmental impact or in fact mitigating measures.

These countries could exploit, transform and often well nearly destroy their natural environment, extinguish species and eliminate bio-diversity under the pretext of 'development'.

The natural resources of those countries were gobbled up with a never stilled hunger for timber, coal, oil, iron ore and other resources while transforming landscapes, polluting rivers and lakes and poisoning the environment.

The political protest movement in the late 60's across Europe and the US eventually saw some of its focus turn to environmental issues and by the 70's most 'developed' nations had to deal with an emerging 'green movement' which eventually transformed itself into action groups and political parties.

In contrast, in this day and age, as in particular the African countries left behind in the economic boom of the post-World War 2 decades try to catch up, they face hostility and dictates of a 'green neo-colonialist nature', where they are told that what was good for the now developed countries then is no longer in the rule books of today.

Exploiting natural resources must now fit into the mindset and rules written by people from developed countries, who in fact thus deny African countries often the only chance to make economic progress and move towards industrialisation.

We in Uganda have ample examples of such meddling in our affairs, and while I cannot deny the good intent of some individuals and organisations, in other cases clearly a hidden agenda is at work to keep us as suppliers of raw materials.

The delay of Bujagali Dam is a case in point, and the seven or eight years have cost the entire country very dearly indeed.
The Southern by-pass, which was due to create a ring road around Kampala once the Northern by-pass road was ready, has also been shelved due to pressures to protect the shorelines and wetlands. In the meantime we suffer traffic gridlock in Kampala.

A modern sawmill near Masindi has been shut down as Europe has closed its doors to tropical African hardwood timber even if harvested in a sustainable manner. The jobs lost seem of little concern to those responsible for shunning our export products.

Tourism, another export industry, has regularly been slapped with anti travel advisories due to obscure dangers and often imagined problems.
Fresh produce and chilled fish is now also threatened by the latest of inventions in Europe; to slap so called carbon debts on airfreighted exports, with the aim to turn the consumers against what is often organic and superior produce from African farms under the pretext of 'environmental concerns'.

And now oil has been found in Uganda, creating more paradoxes for us. The overseas green lobby categorically demands that no exploration must take place inside or near national parks, while their governments in contrast are smacking their lips over the prospect of being able to exploit another poor African country, where the most prized resource of modern age has been found.

These few examples show how difficult it has become to determine what is good for our country keeping environmental concerns in mind and using best international practice to mitigate potential impacts on our biodiversity. The saga over Mabira has clearly not helped, as it was an ill informed campaign by government to turn a rainforest with enormous tourism potential into a sugar plantation.

With this in mind the opponents of exploiting our newly-found oil will equally fight against moving exploration near or into Murchison Falls National Park or into Semliki or the southern sector of Queen Elizabeth National Park.

Government has only itself to blame for the intransigence shown over Mabira in the face of hard facts presented to them at the time. Credibility is at stake now when it comes to oil exploration and every word from government and the oil companies will be closely examined.
We have an obligation to develop and sustainably exploit our natural resources. Already outcries are beginning to emerge over plans to degazette a certain portion of the Kaiso-Tonya wildlife reserve, to allow for the building of a power plant and a mini refinery.

What is required here is an open dialogue between government, the oil companies and stakeholders, which include local communities, civil society at large, business associations and NGO's. We may have to give up a little to gain a lot as a nation and transparent processes will help to generate larger acceptance.

If approached with common sense and a mutual desire for fair progress, conservation and exploration can in fact coexist.

environment matters: Prof. Dr. Wolfgang H. Thome

http://www.monitor.co.ug/artman/publish/sun_news/Conservation_or_oil_exploration_Partners_or_enemies.shtml