A paean in praise of partners' brothers

This infrequently updated blog fell somewhat into abeyance owing to the fact that I acquired a proper job. At least part of the purpose of this site was to suggest to others that I was clever and they should hire me which they now can't. In addition my new role places constraints on what I may write in public (that makes it sound much more interesting than it actually is). So I gave it up, laid down my keyboard and so-on.

Imagine my surprise when my partner's brother complained that I had not updated the blog for a while. Obviously I assumed that he was taking the mickey but he insisted that he was serious. This presents two options:

• he is engaged on a more subtle piece of ridicule than I am capable of imagining
• he is serious

I have decided to assume that he is serious and since he may well be my only reader, I'm back.

The Tsunami

So what else do you write about on the second day of 2005? The numbers are extraordinary: 120,000 dead? 140,000 dead? How many millions left without proper sanitation? And all because of one random, catastrophic event.

The links to Disasters Emergency Committee adorn every web site. Governments are trying to out-bid each other in their generosity. The public of the world have stepped up to the plate and are giving cash in unprecedented amounts.

This blog is supposed to look at the sustainable development angle of news stories. On the face of it, there's not much to be said about SD in this case. The Tsunami was caused by a random geological event, not by climate change, not by over-consumption .But maybe, just maybe, there are lessons for us.

A couple of things have stuck in my mind as the coverage continued:

There is no effective early warning system for Tsunamis in this area. There is an early warning system for Pacific tsunamis (www.prh.noaa.gov/ptwc/). This is another example of global inequality following wealth patterns. We already know that the poorest people suffer the poorest environments, it seems also that they suffer the poorest environmental protection. Not a surprise but maybe now is the time for international action to reduce wealth inequality? Let's face it, it's always the time.

I kept thinking back to the text of the IPCC reports (www.ipcc.ch), coastal communities are predicted to have a hard time as climate change progresses. In particular communities around the current tsunami impact zone:

In 2050, more than 70% (90% by the 2080s) of people in settlements that potentially would be flooded by sea-level rise are likely to be located in a few regions: west Africa, east Africa, the southern Mediterranean, south Asia, and southeast Asia. (Climate Change 2001, Working Group II Impacts, Adaptations and Vulnerability www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg2/310.htm#7222)

And, shortly after that quote, this sensible observation:

If sea-level changes occur slowly, economically rational decisions could be made to protect only property that is worth more than its protection costs. With foresight, settlements can be planned to avoid much of the potential cost of protection, given that between 50 and 100 years are expected to pass before a 1-m sea-level rise would be expected. Yohe and Neumann (1997) offer a method by which this planning might be applied. This method can reduce the costs of protection by more than an order of magnitude.

So, let's make this event the point at which the world takes seriously the fates of those living in coastal areas, tries to reduce the negative effects of their lack of wealth and starts to support them to make rational decisions about future developments.

Shall we?