Archives: Reports

Monsanto: A Corporate Profile

Categories

FoodCommon Resources

 

Monsanto is a global agricultural biotechnology company that specializes in genetically modified (GM) seeds and herbicides, most notably Roundup herbicide and GM Roundup Ready seed. GM seeds have been altered with inserted genetic material to exhibit traits that repel pests or withstand the application of herbicides. In 2009, in the United States alone, nearly all (93 percent) of soybeans and four-fifths (80 percent) of corn were grown with seeds containing Monsanto-patented genetics. The company’s power and influence affects not only the global agricultural industry, but also political campaigns, regulatory processes and the structure of agriculture systems all over the world.

DOWNLOAD PDF

 

Borrowing Trouble: Water Privatization Is a False Solution for Municipal Budget Shortfalls

Categories

WaterCommon Resources

See Food & Water Watch's report

 

See Food & Water Watch’s Report

Water privatization is not a real solution to government financial challenges. It is a one-shot ploy that masks the underlying problems and that delays the hard decisions necessary for real fiscal sustainability. Instead of reducing public bills or mitigating the financial burden on taxpayers, it increases the long-term costs borne by households and local businesses.The 2008 global financial crisis left many governments around the world with serious fiscal challenges. Eroded tax bases and growing health and retirement costs created or worsened local budget deficits across the United States, and a sovereign debt crisis rattled the European Union. Instead of confronting these problems head-on, a number of public officials across the globe sought to lease or sell public water and sewer systems to fund ongoing government functions or to pay down liabilities. That is, they have tried to use water privatization to create the illusion of having balanced the budget, when in fact they are just digging the hole deeper. 

The government’s primary objective in these privatization arrangements is to obtain a sizable upfront payment from the company or consortium that takes over the water or sewer system, often as a desperate response to a fiscal crisis. As a consequence, governments usually award contracts to the bidder that offers them the most money, instead of selecting the highest-quality or least-expensive option for households and local businesses. 

This money is not free; rather, it should be thought of as a loan. Residents and local businesses will have to repay it, with interest, through their water bills. In a 1997 report about wastewater privatization, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said as much: “In summary, any payments a local government receives from the sale or lease of a wastewater infrastructure asset represent a loan from the buyer or lessee which must be repaid with interest by the wastewater users in the form of additional user fees.”

U.S. Energy Insecurity: Why Fracking for Oil and Natural Gas Is a False Solution

DOWNLOAD PDF VIEW ON SCRIBD

But for whom is it really a blessing? Loose talk about domestic oil and natural gas abundance in order to justify and promote widespread drilling and fracking gives Americans a false sense of energy security. Hinging U.S. energy policy on fracking, and thus betting America’s future on the supposed abundance of oil and natural gas, would simply perpetuate America’s destructive dependence on the oil and gas industry. The only security that would be enjoyed is the security of the industry’s profits.Promoters of modern drilling and fracking celebrate the industry’s newfound ability to extract oil and natural gas from shale and other tight rock formations, calling it an energy “revolution,” a “paradigm-shifter,” a “rebirth” and a “game changer.” One recent report claims that North America might soon become “the new Middle East,” a net exporter of oil and natural gas. In April 2012, ConocoPhillips’s CEO at the time called shale gas a “blessing.” In this report, Food & Water Watch exposes the misconceptions, falsehoods and misleading statements behind the claims that modern drilling and fracking for oil and natural gas can deliver U.S. energy security. Briefly, Food & Water Watch finds that:

  • The popular claim that the United States has 100 years worth of natural gas presumes not only that no place would be off-limits to drilling and fracking, but also that highly uncertain estimates of domestic natural gas resources are accurate;
  • Even assuming that the industry’s dreams of unrestricted drilling and fracking for natural gas come true and that resource estimates prove accurate, plans to increase the rate of consumption of U.S. natural gas easily cut the claim to 50 years, well within the lifetime of college students today;
  • Among these plans are 19 proposals, as of October 26, 2012, to sell U.S. natural gas on foreign markets to maximize oil and gas profits. Combined, these proposals alone mean that annual natural gas exports could reach the equivalent of over 40 percent of total U.S. consumption of natural gas in 2011; and
  • Even if the highly uncertain estimates of “tight oil” reserves prove accurate, and even if the oil and gas industry wins unrestricted access to drill and frack for oil, the estimated reserves would amount to a supply of less than seven years.

The United States can transition off of fossil fuels, but it will require remaking the U.S. energy system around proven clean energy solutions: conservation, efficiency and renewables. Such a remaking would underpin broadbased and sustained economic growth, circumvent the environmental and public health costs of extracting and burning fossil fuels and usher in an era of true U.S. energy security, independence and resilience. The threat is that the fossil fuel industry — empowered by its deep pockets, armed with increasingly intensive extraction methods and bolstered by entrenched infrastructure and demand for its product — will succeed in delaying the necessary transformation for decades, just to protect its bottom line. Now is the time for the United States to declare independence from the oil and gas industry.

Factory-Fed Fish: How the Soy Industry is Expanding into the Sea

Categories

FoodCommon Resources

Read the full report.

DOWNLOAD PDF
VIEW ON SCRIBD

The soy industry’s involvement in aquaculture is a tale of how far-reaching the influence of a large,powerful, well-organized agribusiness can be. Although soy is an unexpected and unnatural food for fish to eat, the research and outreach funded by the soy industry has propelled it to the forefront of alternative feed research in the aquaculture industry. Because of the widespread concern about fish farming’s reliance on small, wild fish for feed, the industry has been able to position soybeans as an answer to aquaculture’s sustainability problems. Unfortunately, however, feeding soy to fish is far from sustainable. By supporting factory fish farming, the soy industry could not only help to expand an industry that degrades marine environments, threatens wild fish populations and damages coastal communities, it could also extend its own negative impacts.

Fracking: The New Global Water Crisis

Categories

Food

Read the full report.Within the past decade, technological advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” have enabled the oil and gas industry to extract large quantities of oil and natural gas from shale formations in the United States. However, the practice has proven controversial. Pollution from modern drilling and fracking has caused wide­spread environmental and public health problems and created serious, long-term risks to under­ground water resources.

In this report, Food & Water Europe reviews the risks and costs of shale development that have been demonstrated in the United States, including eco­nomic costs that run counter to industry-backed claims about the economic benefits of the practice.

DOWNLOAD PDF VIEW ON SCRIBD

Briefly:Food & Water Europe then summarizes the state of shale development in six selected countries: France, Bulgaria, Poland, South Africa, China and Argentina.

  • Strong public opposition to fracking in France and Bulgaria has led to national bans on the practice.
  • The government of Poland has welcomed oil and gas industry plans to develop shale re­sources in the country, but charges of bribery during the process of awarding leases have tainted these plans.
  • Pending an environmental review by the South African government, Royal Dutch Shell may soon be granted permission to drill and frack in South Africa’s Karoo Basin.
  • The Chinese government is pushing an expan­sion of shale development, and numerous oil and gas companies are partnering with Chinese firms, both in the United States and in China.
  • In Argentina, oil and gas companies have begun developing shale oil and shale gas resources in the Neuquén Basin, with the support of the Argentinean government.

Instead of exposing their citizens to the damages of modern drilling and fracking, countries around the world should enact national bans on the practice and invest aggressively in the deployment of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies

Public-Public Partnerships: An Alternative Model to Leverage the Capacity of Municipal Water Utilities

Read the full report.

DOWNLOAD PDF

Clean drinking water and wastewater treatment are basic services that societies and governments provide. Water is a necessity for life, and safe water and sanitation are crucial for public health. In July 2010, the United Nations declared access to clean water and sanitation to be a human right. But recognizing the human right to water does not explain how to deliver this right to households. Even with this commitment to enhance water delivery and safety, an estimated 884 million people worldwide lack access to safe water, and 2.6 billion lack access to improved sanitation. Meeting this need requires significant investments in infrastructure and expertise. In the last 20 years, major multinational efforts have relied on private sector strategies in both developed and developing countries to provide water. These approaches have included encouraging public- private partnerships (PPPs) between public water utilities and private water companies.

Proponents of privatization promised increased investment and efficiency, but privatization has failed to meet these expectations. Instead, it often has led to deteriorating infrastructure, service disruptions and higher prices for poorer service.

A different model, called public-public partner- ships (PUPs), can be a more effective method for providing services. In contrast to privatization, which puts public needs into the hands of profit- seeking corporations, PUPs bring together public officials, workers and communities to provide better service for all users more efficiently.PUPs allow two or more public water utilities or non-governmental organizations to join forces and leverage their shared capacities. PUPs allow multiple public utilities to pool resources, buying power and technical expertise. The benefits of scale and shared resources can deliver higher public efficiencies and lower costs.

These public partnerships, whether domestic or international, improve and promote public delivery of water through sharing best practices. The partnerships can take many forms and may include networks of public water operators in different areas or non-governmental organiza- tions. As a public collaboration, no PUP partner can generate a profit through the partnership. In short, PUPs provide the collaborative advantages of private partnerships without the profit-extracting focus of private operators, and they promote the public interest mission of equitably delivering water services.

Although PUPs can be used for many public func- tions, including roads and electricity, they have particular applicability to water. Access to safe drinking water varies widely across the globe. The United Nations Millennium Declaration aimed to “halve the proportion of people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water.” To meet that ambitious goal, more than a billion people will need to gain access to safe water and sanita- tion by 2015.

This tremendous undertaking will require both international cooperation and atten- tion to local needs. Public-public partnerships are uniquely suited to this task. The reason that PUPs work so well is that they retain local, public control of existing water systems. Public utilities are responsible for most water and wastewater services worldwide. In 2010, only about 12 percent of the world’s population had water or sewer service that was priva- tized in some way. The nature of water service as a public good and natural monopoly favors the public administration of water systems.