Category Archives: Voices

SYLFF Chamber Music Seminar 2006 at The Juilliard School

July 15, 2008
By null

(The following is an excerpt from the SYLFF Newsletter No.15, May 2006)

Bärli Nugent

January 8th, 2006 was a dreary winter day, but the excitement in the arrivals hall of John F. Kennedy International Airport was palpable. A small group from Juilliard stood behind the barrier, straining to see the travelers emerging from the U.S. Customs section. Five young people had flown through the night from Vienna and landed an hour earlier; five more were soon due in on a flight from Paris. Any string or wind instruments in the crowd? We didn’t know what the students looked like, and we were not sure they would spot the friendly but small, hand-lettered “Juilliard School” signs we were holding. We were eager to welcome them to New York for the start of a project that had been dreamed about and worked on for two years.

This project, later called in this, its inaugural year the ‘SYLFF Chamber Music Seminar at The Juilliard School of the Ryoichi Sasakawa Young Leaders Fellowship Fund Fellows Mobility Program’, marked the first collaboration in a landmark three-year series of exchanges involving the Conservatoire National Superieur de Musique et de Danse de Paris, the Universitat fur Musik und darstellende Kunst Wien, and The Juilliard School. These exchanges have been designed to foster an educational and artistic experience that embraced the learning process at the heart of each institution. A 10-day chamber music seminar, hosted by each institution in turn during the three-year period, incorporated five students from each visiting institution into a chamber music event at the host school.

The seminar at Juilliard placed the 10 visiting students—from Austria, Bulgaria, France, Germany, Hungary, and Poland—into 4 chamber ensembles with 9 Juilliard students—from Canada, China, Germany, and the United States. These 4 ensembles joined 14 others that together made up the performers of ChamberFest 2006. ChamberFest is an opportunity for the serious chamber musicians at Juilliard to return to the school during the final week of the winter break for an intensive week of rehearsals and daily coaching on a substantial piece of chamber music. The second week of ChamberFest coincides with the reopening of the school, and the 18 ensembles perform in six concerts given during that week.

People continued to come from the U.S. Customs section in waves. When at last a tall young man emerged with a cello strapped to his back, accompanied by four other people carrying cases for violins, a bassoon, and a trumpet, we saw the looks of relief that spread across their weary faces as they spotted us, and we knew that the SYLFF fellows from the Universitat fur Musik und darstellende Kunst Wien had finally arrived. They were greeted in German by Juilliard graduate and cellist Sabine Frick, escorted to the waiting bus, and whisked off to Juilliard. Our five guests from the Conservatoire National Superieur de Musique et de Danse de Paris arrived shortly thereafter, easily identified by their cases for clarinet, trombone, violin, viola, and cello. This group was greeted in French by Juilliard graduate and harpist Sivan Magen, and then also whisked off to Juilliard. The 10 musicians settled into Juilliard’s residence hall in rooms on the 22nd and 29th floors, which offer spectacular views of New York City and the nearby Hudson River, and then went for dinner in the school’s cafeteria with the Juilliard students. I was profoundly moved by the enthusiasm and sincerity of our guests, and I was eager to see what their collaboration with our students would bring.

Days later, I found myself wandering about on Juilliard’s 5th floor, delighted to hear strains of Charles Ives, Antonin Dvor˘ak, Igor Stravinsky, and recent Juilliard alumnus Jefferson Friedman emerging from the studios where the SYLFF ensembles rehearsed. The works by these four composers had been requested by the Juilliard students due to the latter’s desire to share music that represented their own interests and Juilliard’s chamber music traditions. As the days passed, students and faculty alike popped into my office during their breaks, with huge smiles on their faces as they described the joy of discovery, the exhaustion from the long hours of work they were undertaking, and the immense satisfaction of making new friends with each other. Juilliard cello-faculty member Bonnie Hampton perhaps expressed it best when she described the group she coached, saying,

“They were the best group I have had the pleasure of working with at Julliard in terms of attitude, and they were extremely fine players. The other remarkable thing is that they did not know each other at all prior to coming to the Juilliard program, but they worked together extremely well, seriously, and very professionally, and they also seemed to like and enjoy each other. Putting three unknowns together is always a “chance” and this one came up ‘golden.’ None of the musicians had played the Ives Trio before, and they were extremely open and receptive to working with his musical language. It was a real pleasure to work with this group.”

As the days of preparation came to a close, the students joined in our traditional end-of-week ChamberFest Chinese banquet. The marble floors resonated with the laughter and ebullient talk of the 90 ChamberFest participants, who consumed endless trays of lo mein noodles (stir-fried, Cantonese-style egg noodles), sautéed bok choy (Chinese chard), kung po chicken (diced chicken sautéed with sweet peppers and peanuts in spicy pepper sauce), and tofu with mushrooms, among the more than 40 dishes offered. And as is traditional with the ChamberFest banquet, all of the leftovers were wrapped up and given to the students to take back to the residence hall to share in late-night snacking together. This traditional sharing of abundant food from another culture seemed to be a delicious and fitting way to mark the SYLFF exchange as the students prepared for their performance several days hence.

Violinist Elenore Darmon noted,

It [the seminar] was very beneficial because we were put into a situation that one often encounters in a musician’s life: preparing in 10 days a work (contemporary in my case) without knowing one’s partners, and working intensively in order to construct a unity of sound and intonation, and all the while exchanging approaches to the work and choosing an interpretation that pleases each person. And it was also very good for my English!

Juilliard percussionist Luke Rinderknecht remarked,

“Working with the students from Vienna and Paris was certainly an exciting learning experience. Our rehearsals were complicated by language challenges, but with perseverance we learned “L’Histoire du Soldat” and a little of each other’s languages. Our concepts of sound were somewhat different, but through discussions about the educational and musical difference in our various countries I began to understand why that was so. It was a thoroughly fulfilling experience.”

But it was clarinetist Maguy Girard who perhaps summed it up the best, when she said that she

“left home with my clarinets, new tour books, and a new pair of shoes. Result: my tour books are now dog-eared . . . and my shoes have no soles! And the most important thing: I exchanged magnificent musical moments with students from three different nationalities (American, Austrian, and Hungarian). It was during this kind of experience that one can truly realize that music is universal, and especially that it is a language: one can communicate and share emotions without speaking the same verbal language.”

For me, being given the opportunity to observe these collaborations, it was a joy to meet the young people from Europe, entrusted to Juilliard for a too-brief period of time, to see the friendships that began within our walls, and to hear the indescribably beautiful music that resulted. I have also been privileged to make new musical friends myself: early-morning phone conversations across the Atlantic with Paris Conservatoire Deputy Director for External Affairs and Communication Gretchen Amussen introduced me to a soul mate in dreaming and planning for this project, and countless exchanges of e-mail messages with Vienna University’s distinguished professor Wolfgang Klos, whose generosity and energy marked this collaboration. I also gained new friends at The Nippon Foundation and other affiliated organizations: Mr. Yohei Sasakawa, Mr. Tatsuya Tanami, Ms. Kazuko Shiomi, Ms. Ellen Mashiko, Mr. Keita Sugai, and Ms. Takako Nakayama, who bestowed upon Juilliard the honor of their presence at the concert of the SYLFF Chamber Music Seminar at The Juilliard School. Their vision, hailed by Juilliard President Joseph W. Polisi, to nurture future leaders who will transcend geopolitical, ethnic, cultural, religious, and other boundaries for the betterment of humankind has found a home in the performing arts communities of the Vienna Universitat, Paris Conservatoire, and The Juilliard School.

The days passed far too quickly. As the students in turn strode onstage before the packed hall and shared their music, the audience cheered their approval, and I began to dream of the next exchange: Paris in January 2007. It cannot come too soon.

 

Bärli Nugent

Dr. Bärli Nugent is assistant dean, director of chamber music, and a faculty member of The Juilliard School, where she also administers Juilliard’s Mentoring, Scholastic Distinction, and Colloquium programs. She received her bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Juilliard, as well as a doctorate from the State University of New York at Stony Brook. A founding member of the Aspen Wind Quintet, winners of the 1984 Naumburg Chamber Music Award, she has performed in more than 1,000 concerts with the quintet throughout the United States, Europe, the former Soviet Union, and North Africa. She is also an artist-faculty member and director of chamber music for the Aspen Music Festival and School. She was instrumental in planning and running the SYLFF Chamber Music Seminar, in collaboration with her counterparts from the two other SYLFF-endowed music schools.

New Global Leadership as a Guardian of Human Rights and Human Security

July 15, 2008
By 20992

Mr. Svilanovic chairs Working Table I [Democratization and Human Rights], Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe. He served as the minister of foreign affairs of Serbia and Montenegro from 2000 to 2004. He received a SYLFF fellowship in 1990–1991 while working on his master’s thesis in civil procedure at the University of Belgrade.

 

Human Security: A Vague Concept

It is common knowledge that maintaining the territorial security of nation-states through military power has failed to improve their total human condition. In response, the international community has moved to combine economic development with military security and other basic human rights to form a new concept of "human security." Unfortunately, by common assent the concept lacks either a clear definition or any agreed-upon measure of it. Some commentators argue that human security represents a new paradigm for scholars and practitioners alike. Despite these claims, however, it remains uncertain whether the concept of human security can serve as a practical guide for academic research or governmental policymaking, simply because not all neologisms are equally plausible or useful.

 

The Reality concerning Human Security

Sometimes reality is so brutal and so obvious that neither academic definitions nor a consensus is needed in order to conclude that someone’s security and basic human needs and rights are being severely jeopardized. The international community has no clue about how to improve the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan, which are among the world’s 10 most-insecure countries for living, sharing the top-worst-10 positions with 8 countries in Africa. In Iraq and Afghanistan efforts are being made, not only through humanitarian operations but via a military presence, intended to impose some kind of democratic regime. So what can we expect from common efforts to root out poverty and fatal but curable diseases in Africa?

 

A Call for New Global Leadership

Obviously, what is needed is new global leadership with a new approach, presented by different actors in the political and social arenas, that can set deeper the roots of our commonly shared values where they have already been seeded, as in Eastern Europe, but even more important, to work out how we can spread the seeds of the crops we cultivate to where the soil is not yet ready but where many would benefit from their yields, as in Africa. Whether we want it or not, whether we like it or not, whether we see it as a paradox or not, we are jumping into a global order that is not so obvious, that no one fully understands. Whether we understand this new order or not is one issue, but we almost have no choice but to cope with this situation, because it influences our daily lives. It would be good if we would learn more about globalization trends, because this knowledge might help us to know how to conduct our lives under the new circumstances. In contrast to what one might rely on and assume as given, human-rights protection, sustainable peace, development and social cohesion, which are the main features of human security, are not only a matter of concern for national and international decision-makers, but are first and foremost the responsibility of every citizen.

 

The Side Effects of Economic Growth

We can say with great certainty that the foundations of our society have been severely shaken by the economic, social, and cultural revolutions of the later part of the 20th century. A great many of the solutions and structures that existed in the past have been destroyed by the extraordinary dynamism of the economy in which we live. This is throwing an increasing number of men and women into a situation in which they cannot appeal to clear norms, perspectives, and common values, in which they do not know what to do with their individual and collective existence. This is true of institutions such as the family, but also of political institutions that were the foundation of our civilization—the public sphere. Politics, parties, newspapers, organizations, representative assemblies, and states—none of these operate as they used to and as we had supposed they would continue to operate for a long time to come. At present there are no global-scale regulations or institutions that say what we should do or should not do regarding some of the newly emerging challenges, such as the fight against terrorism and nuclear proliferation. In the case of Kosovo, for instance, the current international community is divided on how to resolve the situation. Meanwhile, more often than we would like, we find ourselves without clearly applicable laws that, in this period of global transition and transformation, must be replaced by deeply rooted and widely accepted values and principles to guide us forward. The modern economy cannot operate endlessly without some kind of reference to social traditions and to a new set of values and patterns for collective actions, including those to promote social cohesion and education for democratic citizenship.

 

Potential Leaders to Improve Human Security

Globally cherished icons can dramatically improve human security. Instead of presenting any conclusion that should contain a definition of what new global leaders who might become guardians of improvement of human security worldwide should be, let me draw your attention to the work of one of today’s top fashion models, Liya Kebede from Ethiopia, whose annual earnings total millions of U.S. dollars. Most of you know her from the cover pages of VOGUE magazine, but she has also created the Liya Kebede Foundation dedicated to the welfare of mothers and children (see http://www.liyakebede.com/foundation/lkfoundationhome.html), and she is a WHO Goodwill Ambassador for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health. Her foundation’s mission is to raise awareness of the need to improve the conditions of mothers and children and to fight the horrible facts that each day an average of 1,600 mothers die from complications related to pregnancy and childbirth, and that nearly 11 million children die each year before they reach their fifth birthday, including 4 million who die within the first 28 days of life. Liya is not only a goodwill ambassador who serves as a good example for other influential global celebrities who easily attract public attention, but she is becoming a real global leader herself and a guardian of human security in Africa.

Thank you.

Reflections on the Sylff Program

July 15, 2008
By null

The Sylff Program’s mission―

“To support the education of outstanding students pursuing graduate- level study in the social sciences and humanities who have high

potential for leadership and a commitment to exercising leadership

in local, national, regional and international affairs, in public as well

as in private endeavors. To nurture future leaders who will transcend

geopolitical, religious, ethnic, cultural and other boundaries and will

contribute to peace and the well-being of humankind.

―recognizes the important role of graduate-level (or postgraduate level) study and its impact and ripple-effect throughout all sectors of societies, including the corporate, education, government and non-government sectors. It targets the social sciences and humanities (and performing arts at specific institutions) rather than the natural and applied sciences which not only receive the bulk of funding but generally more public attention.

While focusing on academically outstanding students, the Sylff mission expects that fellowships will be awarded to students with a high potential for and commitment to exercising leadership in local, national, regional and[/or] international arenas, and in ways that benefit the well-being of all and hence contribute to the common good. In sum, recipients of Sylff fellowships (“Sylff fellows”) are expected to complete the degree or program for which the fellowship was awarded and then pursue their careers and personal lives in socially responsible ways and to lead others in doing so. It is a tall order but one which is filled by innumerable Sylff fellows throughout the world.

There are many “stories to tell” of individuals and groups of fellows who are fulfilling the Sylff mission and living its vision―the founder of a scholarship program which enables youngsters from rural villages to attend high school and requires them to return home to teach villagers in their respective dialects during vacation periods; a recent foreign minister and now a leader in a turbulent region; a group of junior university faculty members who have helped transform an impoverished community through an environmental project; young musicians who organize and perform charity concerts to benefit orphanages; and much more. Their stories underscore the fact that Sylff fellows indeed act and have an impact far beyond the Sylff community.

The engine which drives the Sylff Program is its endowment scheme. Rather than the donor (The Nippon Foundation) or the program administrator (The Tokyo Foundation) receiving applications from individuals, universities throughout the world are invited to submit applications to receive endowments or permanent funds of US$1 million each. Selected institutions then invest and manage their Sylff endowments, and use the earnings on their investments to provide Sylff fellowships to graduate-level, enrolled students thus empowering the universities and allowing them to plan over the long-term because they have a sustainable source of revenue. In other words, the endowment scheme generates ownership and takes away uncertainty so a stable program can be planned and implemented.

The Sylffinstitutions also decide on the academic disciplines or themes of their fellowship programs. Examples of theme-based fellowship programs include “Pluralisms, Conflict Resolution and Democratic Governance” (Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia) and “Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on the Socio-economic, Political and Cultural Dimensions of Human Development” (Jawaharlal Nehru University, India). There are also mechanisms for endowed-universities to alter the academic disciplines or themes of their fellowship programs after a period of time to meet changing needs and priorities.

The lubricants which have helped keep the engine running are the so-called follow-up programs implemented by The Tokyo Foundation for enrolled and graduated Sylff fellows and endowed-university administrators, and online and face-to-face contact which have fostered a sense of belonging and ownership of the Sylff Program by all and mutual trust. Even hybrid vehicles require lubricants to increase the ease of their functioning. In much the same way, the Sylff engine requires lubricants not only to improve its functioning but also to help ensure that the engines power Sylff vehicles to follow a mutual road map (mission) to reach an ultimate goal (vision).

There are currently 68 endowed universities and consortia in 44 countries that make up a colorful parade of Sylff vehicles of different years, makes and models but they share a fundamental commitment to academic excellence and educating and nurturing the next generations to help ensure that the world will be a better place for all. Sylff vehicles travel different roads―some smooth and straight, others filled with pot-holes and sometimes requiring detours―but they are headed in the same direction.

I vividly recall attending a meeting of representatives of African NGOs and U.S. foundations several years ago in New York City. Although I was an observer, I was called upon to introduce the Sylff Program. The first question which I received from a foundation representative was, “Do you actually trust all of the universities to manage their endowments and to administer their fellowship programs?” The second interjection came from a representative of an African NGO who clapped her hands and said, “That’s just what we need, not vast amounts but permanent funds that will enable us to develop and implement strategic plans, and sustain and nurture our organization’s projects. We are responsible people and want to be trusted and encouraged.”

It took some discipline for me to stifle a clap and cheer while first explaining that the foundation and prospective recipient universities engage in considerable discussion about where and how the endowment will be invested, transparent and equitable administration and focus of the fellowship program, participation in the Sylff network, and the submission of annual reports. Then I said clearly, mostly for the U.S. foundation representatives, yes, we trust the universities―the endowment is theirs, in perpetuity, barring any gross mismanagement and the foundations’ (donor and program administrator) commitment to the universities and fellows is life-long.

This and many other first-hand experiences have underscored that the Sylff Program is based upon and thrives on mutual learning, trust and collaboration between and among the foundations (The Nippon Foundation and The Tokyo Foundation), endowed universities and the more than 10,000 Sylff fellows.

 

Thinking and acting outside the box

In the case of the Sylff Program, thinking and acting outside the proverbial box is not simply an exercise but lies within its very essence. In 1986, then The Nippon Foundation President Yohei Sasakawa made a significant leap outside the prevailing box when he transformed his father’s vision into the Sylff Program, then a rare case for a private Japanese grant-making foundation. Twenty-two years later, it is still rare for foundations in and outside Japan to endow universities, particularly in developing countries.

Mr. Sasakawa’s strong commitment and belief in the program led him to take another big step when he led efforts by The Nippon Foundation to establish and fund The Tokyo Foundation in 1997, first and foremost to strengthen and enhance the Sylff Program and secondarily other scholarship activities (by the new foundation’s Scholarship Division), and to engage in policy studies (Research Division). (At the time, the Japanese government was limiting the number of new foundations hence the scholarship and research initiatives were joined into a single organization.)

During the second decade of Sylff, he continued to be a generous source of support and inspiration. Combined with the expertise and guidance of the Scholarship Programs Advisory Board (previously called the International Advisory Committee), the Sylff Program continued to innovate and translate the Sylff vision and mission into follow-up programs and activity, including the building of the Sylff Network, the mechanism that allows the Sylff community to keep the engines running at best levels of performance.

Sylff institutions not only participated in and facilitated follow-up programs but some also initiated and engaged in university-to-university and in some cases, consortium programs and activity with funding from sources other than Sylff. In other words, they too explicitly or implicitly thought and acted outside the box. A dozen universities have also hosted various forums and meetings and thus made incalculable in-kind contributions.

During the same period, a growing number of Sylff fellows actively participated in follow-up programs, including the Sylff Fellows Council. Through their research, social action and networking initiatives, they too innovated, experimented and acted on top of their ongoing academic work, and professional and personal responsibilities. They deserve a loud round of applause not only for multi-tasking but also for leading and serving as role models for others within and beyond the Sylff community.

For all stakeholders, thinking and acting outside the box involved both process and content matters―taking bold steps in making processes participatory and more transparent, and designing follow-up programs and activity to facilitate trans-disciplinary, trans-national research and social action.

 

Moving forward

The Sylff Program is not perfect nor a panacea for all ills. It is a living system and thus a work-in-progress that requires ongoing reexamination, fine-tuning and transformation if it is to strengthen, grow and mature. There are various mechanisms to reexamine and fine-tune existing programs and activity, such as self-study techniques. However, transformation in the context of higher education, and thus of Sylff, goes beyond the rational processes and substance of assessment and cost-benefit analyses. As Richard H. Hersh recently wrote, “Transformation is about intellectual deepening and broadening; …rigorous and humble introspection; …encountering the great human conversations as a means of learning how to construct meaning in far more defensible and rigorous ways. [And] learning―and the transformation it fosters―is never strictly cognitive….Learning is about being able to link thought and emotion, and all with action, in ways that are humane, caring and responsible” (The Chronicle of Higher Education, August 1, 2008, p. A64 ).

On the world stage, the Sylff family of fellows, universities and the foundations may be a modest company of actors in terms of numbers but together and through individual endeavors the clan can make a difference. A quarter century ago, scientist Lewis Thomas wrote in a collection of essays:

“Altruism, in its biological sense, is required of us. We have an enormous family to look after, or perhaps that assumes too much, making us sound like official gardeners and zookeepers for the planet, responsibilities for which we are probably not grown-up enough. We may need new technical terms for concern, respect, affection, substitutes for altruism. But at least we should acknowledge the family ties and, with them, the obligations. If we do it wrong, scattering pollutants, clouding the atmosphere with too much carbon dioxide, extinguishing the thin carapace of ozone, burning up the forests, dropping the bombs, rampaging at large through nature as though we owned the place, there will be a lot of paying back to do and, at the end, nothing to pay back with.” (Late Night Thoughts on Listening to Mahler’s Ninth Symphony, 1983, pp. 106-107).

What will the Sylff family choose to do in its third decade? Commit to further mutual learning, collaborative action and transforming challenges into opportunities? Do “good” but in seclusion or for self-serving purposes? Slip into indifference, complacency and inactivity? Do we have a choice?

The SYLFF Asia/Pacific Regional Forum: Reliving the Event

July 15, 2008
By 21158

Sherilyn Siy (standing), a member of the SYLFF Fellows Council, leading a workshop.

Sherilyn Siy (standing), a member of the SYLFF Fellows Council, leading a workshop.

The summer of 2006 was passing as a usual Kolkata summer for us at Jadavpur University (JU). The heat and the dust were taking their toll on everybody, and occasional rainstorms brought only temporary relief. Each of us in the JU-SYLFF family was following his or her usual routine —research, teaching, association activities, reviews, and so on. Little did we know that very soon we would receive a big surprise and then be facing an even bigger challenge. Very soon we would be migrating from the local arena to the global domain, from the mundane to the unusual.

On one of those hot and dusty days, the JU-SYLFF project director, Prof. Joyashree Roy, called an emergency meeting of JU’s SYLFF fellows. Each one of us thought that the meeting would be another routine one at which we would have to inform her about the progress of the association’s activities. We had no reason to be apprehensive; we had meticulously charted our progress. But the meeting turned out to reveal a complete surprise for all of us.

At the meeting, Prof. Roy informed us that the Scholarship Division, in a letter to the vice chancellor of the university, had requested JU to host the SYLFF Asia/ Pacific Regional Forum in November 2007. Prof. Roy asked us what our reaction was to this proposal. We were spellbound. We knew that the scale of the program was very large, and we were not sure if we were prepared for it. At the same time, we were proud that our university had been asked to host this mega-event. It was a big honor—but an even bigger responsibility. Unanimously, we voiced our consent— knowing well that we were facing a big challenge. But each of us was determined to make the best effort to turn the event into a grand success.

Life was never the same thereafter. Days were spent making decisions about activities, responsibilities, deadlines, and teams. All of us knew that the planning had to be meticulous and that we must learn to work together. Since that summer of 2006, every member of the JU-SYLFF family made the maximum effort possible for the cause of the forum. The fellows not only worked overtime, but did so with determination and zeal that knew no bounds. The JU-SYLFF project director and the SYLFF steering committee members constantly worked as a guiding force —setting targets, regularly monitoring progress, and making critical decisions on a daily basis. We received unstinted support from numerous people at the university. There was a palpable enthusiasm within the university’s academic community regarding the theme of the forum: Human Rights and Creative Leadership. India, whose economy is one of the fastest-growing in the world, is faced with the critical task of guaranteeing human rights for its huge population. The social sciences faculty and their students wanted to learn from the experiences of other nations—a prospect that the forum assured. Also, the prospect for deliberating on the many facets of creative leadership in the context of human rights in various economies, in different phases of development, was extremely exciting to many in the JU academic community.

The support that we received from the Scholarship Division was tremendous. The tool kit that the division provided for organizing the forum made our work simpler than it otherwise would have been. The kit charted out the major activities and important timelines. Quick decisions, constructive suggestions, and timely reminders flowed constantly from the Scholarship Division, which always responded within 24 hours to our questions and concerns—whether it was a weekday or a weekend. And each response was filled with encouragement and enthusiastic support for our endeavors.

A lot of work had to be done— arranging the venue and accommodations for the guests, preparing the program schedule, arranging city tours and visits to sites for social action, and so on. The university extended its help to us, thereby facilitating our completion of these tasks. Soon after the local associations and the SYLFF institutions finalized the list of participants, we started working on the participants’ travel schedules. This involved coordinating with almost 60 people from different countries. Each participant was extremely cooperative, accommodating some odd requests from us and greatly easing our work. We constantly felt that we were working as part of one big family within which distance, geographical boundaries, or differences in languages did not matter; what mattered was the success of a common cause.

The forum was held November 20th–22nd, 2007, at JU. I was fortunate to participate in the forum. I wish to take this opportunity to thank all the members of the JU-SYLFF association who selected me as an official participant from JU. Participating in the forum was indeed a once-in-a-lifetime experience —meeting people from diverse cultures, interacting and exchanging ideas with members of a worldwide academic community, and most importantly, making friends with people from different countries.

The three days of the forum were characterized by intense discussions on the forum’s theme. The oral and poster presentations focused on the issue of human rights and how creative leadership can create and sustain an enabling environment for realizing human rights. The spirited keynote speech by Dr. Egla Martinez- Salazar (a SYLFF Prize winner) raised a critical question: Who benefits from the existing sociopolitical and legal structures and human rights activities? With this important question as a backdrop, the participants discussed the role of education, economic development, culture, politics, governance, and civil society as means for creating an environment that supports human rights. The discussions revealed that besides considering the fundamental human factors while embarking on any human rights related activity, it is also necessary to do a cost-benefit analysis of any strategy intended to ensure human rights. The discussions also brought forward the fact that creative leaders can exist in different spheres of an economy, society, and polity, and that each leader can contribute in her or his own ways (large or small) to strengthen the forces that are vital for realizing human rights. Case studies and reports of different countries’ experiences stressed the role of creative leaders as agents of change.

The discussions at the forum revealed that the concept of human rights has a trans-disciplinary dimension to it. This topic must be moved from the domain of lawyers to the realms of various disciplines, so that feasible and holistic solutions to human rights problems can be obtained. The forum was instrumental in reshaping the way that many of us think and act.

The forum also gave the participating fellows an opportunity to learn about networking. The coordinators, Ms. Jeanne Ing Lee and Ms. Sherilyn Siy, acting on behalf of the SYLFF Fellows Council, took great care to conduct memorable sessions where the participants learned how to build successful and effective networks. The fellows shared the best practices of their networks and the steps they have taken to promote team-building and collaboration. These best practices can become models for creating sustainable networks that are spirited and performing.

Starting in the summer of 2006, our journey to the SYLFF Asia/Pacific Regional Forum in the winter of 2007 was an extremely thrilling and rewarding experience. That journey taught us fundamental skills for organizing an international event. We have also benefited academically—through the rich discussions on economic, social, political, and cultural aspects of human rights.

As a result of that journey and the forum, the SYLFF fellows at JU hope to host another SYLFF regional forum sometime in the future.

Report on an Indonesian Seminar on Community-based Disaster Management: “Developing Community Independence in Facing Natural Disasters”

July 15, 2008
By null

(The following is an excerpt from the SYLFF Newsletter No.17, Jan 2007)

Andri Rosadi and Jiah Fauziah

The great tsunami that hit Aceh, in Sumatra, Indonesia, and several other areas in the world on December 26th, 2004, and that killed hundreds of thousands of people, has been followed by many other natural disasters in Indonesia. Two months after the tsunami, Nias Island suffered from a big earthquake that also killed people and destroyed houses. Then on May 27, 2006, Yogyakarta, one of the most important cities in Java, was also shaken by a great earthquake from the south while people were anticipating the eruption of a volcano located north of the city. About two months later, a tsunami hit Pangandaran and some other southern areas of Java. Actually, during the above-mentioned time many more earthquakes occurred in other parts of Indonesia, but fortunately they did not cause much damage for people. Nonetheless, all these disasters made many Indonesian people aware that they live on moving lands that might experience many more such serious calamities.

The earthquake disaster that occurred in May 2006 in Yogyakarta, the city where our SYLFF institution, Gadjah Mada University is located, was the main inspiration for the seminar. That earthquake caused more than six thousand deaths and reduced thousands of houses to ruins. When responding to such a tragedy, one important thing to consider is how to develop the independence of the community for facing any future disaster it might experience. This was highlighted in the case of the aforementioned disaster because the victims had to rely on the local government of Yogyakarta, who were themselves too dependent on central government when it came to aiding victims. Moreover, although it is true that the victims needed assistance from all parts of society, when assistance from others is believed to be the only solution, the result is a mental dependence on the part of the victims, along with other consequences that negatively affect the post-disaster reconstruction process. It appears that such was the case in Yogyakarta. Several months after the great calamity, people still seem to be suffering and longing for help.

Based on this reality, the SYLFF Fellows Association of Gadjah Mada University held the aforementioned seminar regarding the problem. It is expected that the seminar results will be used as input for various relevant segments of society. The association invited two speakers to the seminar: Dr. P. M. Laksono, an anthropologist and lecturer in the Faculty of Cultural Sciences at Gadjah Mada University, and Ms. Estuning Tyas, a current SYLFF fellow and graduate student at Gadjah Mada University, specializing in disaster management.

In his talk, Dr. Laksono commented on the slow reaction of both local and central government in responding to the disaster. The local government relied on the central one, whereas in this case, disaster response was mainly the responsibility of the local government, because the impact of the May 2006 disaster was regional, in contrast to the case of the tsunami that hit Aceh, causing a disaster that was national in scope. In this situation, according to Laksono, the factor that ended up playing the most important role was the media. Thanks to their nationwide and worldwide networks, they succeeded in raising public awareness and support on a widespread level, resulting in the huge amount of help received. Nevertheless, Laksono also criticized the media for their tendency to present the news in a way that created bias and adversely influenced how people regarded the disaster.

Besides the media, there are several other elements of the community that play important roles in responding to disasters. These elements are informal and outside the governmental structure, usually offering help spontaneously and based solely on humanitarianism. Their weakness lies in lack of organizational management, which often results in many obstacles to their being able to help effectively. One of the obstacles is corruption or deviousness on the part of some parties that use the disaster situation for their own benefit.

Nonetheless, the effectiveness of certain groups in the community has proved to significantly contribute to assisting the disaster victims and lessening their suffering. Based on this fact, what needs to be done in the future is to further develop such community-based disaster response measures and to learn from past problems.

In regard to community-based disaster response measures, one thing that must be emphasized in advance is the empowerment of the overall society in the handling of a disaster. This must be based on the ability and potential of the society. The main obstacle in this regard is that a society usually breaks apart when a disaster occurs, making it impossible for the full ability and potential of the society to be utilized to solve problems. Another obstacle is that the people tend to forget the disaster very quickly, so that they do not anticipate future disasters. If disasters are experienced so frequently, a society should realize that it needs to formulate a model for handling disasters in ways that rely mostly on the society’s own capabilities and potential. However, this is still yet to happen.

The other speaker, Estuning Tyas, emphasized the need to socialize disaster knowledge in the community. It is a fact that people in Indonesian villages, who generally have a low level of education, do not have enough knowledge about disasters. This limits both their view of disasters and their ability to handle their own problems in a disaster situation.

To increase the ability of a community to handle a disaster, Estuning discussed several steps that Eko Teguh Paripurno, a disaster-relief/crisis-management expert, has suggested: (1) Identify potential disaster areas; (2) Map these disaster areas; (3) Identify specific danger-areas and the possible risks associated with them; (4) Identify the socio-cultural characteristics of the communities in the danger-areas; (5) Formulate procedures and identify steps to be taken in dealing with the disasters; (6) Develop the social systems to help people to learn how to anticipate and handle disasters, based on the potential and strengths of their community; and (7) Develop natural-disaster prevention and response technologies. In order to make all these steps community based, they must include the involvement of the community: together by and for the members of the community, not only by experts and the government.

An additional important point to be considered here is that disaster education is still not included in schools’ curricula in Indonesia. Similarly, at the family level, children have not been taught to recognize, understand, and deal with disasters. Therefore, the first and most important step to implement all the following steps, is to educate people, especially villagers, to make them aware of the socio-geographical condition of their locales in regard to possible disasters. To be effective, this educational model must use many kinds of engaging media, such as films, to deliver the message.

In brief, both Estuning Tyas and Laksono emphasized the need for disaster education in order for a community to increase awareness of its own strengths and weaknesses so that it can handle its own problems if a disaster occurs. As a follow-up to the discussion, the SYLFF Fellows Association of Gadjah Mada University plans to organize some social action projects aimed at educating people in villages around Yogyakarta so that they can recognize their own potential for handling any disasters that might befall them. Fortunately, the SYLFF fellows of Gadjah Mada University have different academic backgrounds: economics, cultural studies, political science, geography, and conflict resolution. Such a combination of multi-disciplinary backgrounds holds great potential for engaging in a variety of actions reflecting different approaches.

The actions are planned to involve formal and informal measures. Formally, the association will provide disaster education in schools and for some small community groups. Informally, it will hold some community entertainment programs that will indirectly educate a larger number of people. It is hoped that these actions will greatly contribute to the communities’ ability to effectively deal with disasters.

 

Andri Rosadi

Andri Rosadi

Andri graduated with a major in Islamic civilization from the University of Al-Azhar, Cairo, in 2003, and received an MA in anthropology from Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, in 2006, in which he was supported by a SYLFF Fellowship. He has worked in several organizations, including Ikatan Cendekiawan Muslim Indonesia and Muhammadiyah Student, both based in Cairo, as a coordinator. He was a teacher in Medan, North Sumatra, in 1996, in Kediri, East Java, in 1997, and in Yogyakarta, in 2003–04. Since 2004, he has been involved in community development work in Ngaglik Village, Sleman, Yogyakarta.

 

Jiah Fauziah

Jiah Fauziah

Jiah graduated with a major in English from Gadjah Mada University in 1999, and earned a master’s degree in linguistics from the same university, for which she was awarded a SYLFF Fellowship. 

 

SYLFF Goes to Mindanao

July 15, 2008
By 21162

An art workshop involving young adults and teens from various indigenous people’s (IP) groups from different provinces in Mindanao, the island group at the southern part of the Philippines, was held on January 26-27, 2008 in Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis Oriental, Philippines, in partnership with the Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center, Inc. Lumads, or indigenous people, are native to Mindanao and are neither Christians nor Muslims. 1　26 participants were taught basic principles and techniques in art by Errol Balcos of the Oro Art Guild CDO, which they were able to apply to their own artworks when they were later given the chance to work on them.

Aside from the art session, there were lots of other activities that allowed the participants to share their identity and aspirations to one another. There was a sharing session, wherein the participants were able to name the IP organization they belonged to, the difficulties and concerns of their tribe, and their personal dreams for themselves and their communities.

There was also a cultural/solidarity night, where each IP group performed their native dances and songs. Other groups also recited poetry. Many of these presentations reflected the participants’ hopes and dreams; some chronicled their tribe’s history whereas others described the oppression and injustice they have suffered from.

There were also icebreakers that allowed the participants to explore the open areas of the venue and at the same time cooperate with each other in a fun, physical activity.

In order to maximize exposure to the living conditions and experiences of fellow Filipinos in the southern part of the Philippines, the SYLFF fellows visited the community of farmers in Sumilao, Bukidnon who participated in a historic walk from Bukidnon to Manila to pressure the Philippine government to bestow upon them ownership of a disputed 144-hectare land in Bukidnon, appropriately called the “144.” 2 This exposure trip was implemented in cooperation with Balay Alternative Legal Advocates for Development in Mindanaw, Inc. (BALAOD Mindanaw). The fellows listened to the farmers’ stories about their experiences during the Sumilao Walk, their struggle for ownership of 144, their dreams and plans for when the land is bestowed upon them, and their steadfast determination to implement more actions consistent with their goal. The fellows also had a chance to visit a camp that the Sumilao farmers had erected outside the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) Regional Office in Cagayan de Oro City, with the goal of imposing their presence and objectives upon the agency as a ubiquitous reminder that the latter has yet to fulfill their duty in relation to the said quandary. Here, the fellows witnessed and heard first-hand the difficulties that the farmers had to bear during this protest such as the foul smell emanating from the drainage on top of which they pitched their tent, the extreme heat at noon, the occasional rain, mosquitoes and other insects, the resulting diseases, separation from their families for at least one week, and the inability to till their lands.

    1. The participants of the art workshop are indigenous people known in the Philippines as Lumads. The term "Lumad" is a collective term for all the indigenous people in the Mindanao island group. Therefore there are many different indigenous groups referred to using the umbrella-term "Lumad" (e.g., Manobo, T'boli, etc.). Indigenous people are those who inhabit specific geographic regions in which they have the earliest historical and cultural connection with. One of the biggest issues they face concerns their ancestral lands, which they struggle to protect from logging and mining companies, and multinational corporations.
    1. The Lumad Higaonon tribe farmers of Sumilao, Bukidnon in Mindanao, walked all the way from Bukidnon to Manila (yes, all 1,700 kilometers on foot!) to petition the government to get their 144 hectares of land back. The large corporation ‘San Miguel Foods, Inc.’ had claimed the land and wanted to convert it into a hog farm.

       

      It took the farmers 2 months to walk from Bukidnon to reach Manila. Last year, in December 2007, ownership of this land was granted to them.

 

“Global and Local Encounters” Seminar Organized by SYLFF Association at Helsinki University

July 15, 2008
By null

On a very beautiful autumn day at the end of September 2008, the SYLFF Association at Helsinki University organised a one-day-seminar, “Global and Local Encounters.” It was co-organised with the Confucius Institute at the University.

 

Global and local processes are multilayered and interrelated. Particular cultures, traditions, languages, and histories are in a continuous dialogue. Post-colonial theories look beyond the local-global dichotomy, emphasizing change and continuity. In order to understand global and local encounters a multidisciplinary research is necessary. Thus, different interpretations of global processes at local levels and impacts of local on global flows are needed. Many political, economical and cultural processes are parts of global transformations, but they are connected to local differences that bring new elements to global interconnected processes. This conference sought to gather scholars from different academic disciplines to engage in discussions on the constructions of local and global identities, as well as gender and minority issues linked with shared global spaces. In addition to neo-liberal globalization, the aim was to address the impacts of global political and cultural transformations at local levels. Since both “local” and “global” have been mystified and objectified, papers on the topic of how local and global processes take places in various ways in different places were also encouraged. Understanding contemporary interrelated global and local issues requires an analysis of geographical, cultural, and historical differences linked with spatial distribution of power relations.

 

Professor Kauko Laitinen, the Director of Confucius Institute and the coordinator of SYLFF programmes at the University, opened the seminar.

Dr. Pirjo Kristiina Virtanen, the chairperson of the SYLFF Association at Helsinki University, thanked the Tokyo Foundation and the Confucius Institute for their kind support to make this seminar come true. She also warmly welcomed the audience.

 

All six presenters were SYLFF fellows. The paper presentations were made on the following topics:

 

    • Negotiating Human Rights-Based Approach and Charity-Based Approach: Development Cooperation and Experiences of Deaf Women in Uganda (by Hisayo Katsui)

 

    • Secularization in Contemporary Tibet - Critical Remarks (by Mitra Härkönen)
    • Tibetan Refugee Settlement Thobgyal Sarpa: the Only Tibetan Bonpo Community in India (by Thupten K. Lunch)

 

    • Global Encounters in Indigenous Education (by Tuija Veintie)

 

    • Global Youth Cultures and Amazonian Native Adolescence (by Pirjo Kristiina Virtanen)

 

    • “Partnership” between Northern NGOs and Vietnamese Counterpart Organisations (by Minna Hakkarainen and Hisayo Katsui)

 

 

Each paper received great attention and constructive comments for further improvement of the research. Throughout the day, we had a lively discussion on the set theme of global and local encounters, especially on the topics of whose terms the norms are set, who were represented in the negotiation of encounters, and identity of those who are exposed to both local and global phenomenon, among others. Even though fellows were from different disciplinary backgrounds, we found many interesting aspects in common.

 

At the very end of the seminar, the presenters discussed the seminar proceedings. Our association will be publishing a book with the presented papers under the great leadership of Pirjo Kristiina Virtanen, the chairperson of the association. Pirjo and Tuija Veintie volunteered for the role of editors for the book. The book will be published in the Renvall Publication Series of the University early next year.

 

SYLFF related publications were displayed on one table at the seminar to widely share our activities.

 

Now, I am still excited that we had such a fruitful seminar. We would like to thank the Tokyo Foundation and the Confucius Institute for their moral and financial support in making this activity come true.

About Warmth — Charity Activities Organized by SYLFF Fellows in Vienna

July 15, 2008
By 19588

(The following is an excerpt from the SYLFF Newsletter No.18, May 2007)

Adriana Paler-Nicolescu

Adriana (third from right, standing) and orphan girls with donated gifts at Floare de Colt (Noble Flower).

Adriana (third from right, standing) and orphan girls with donated gifts at Floare de Colt (Noble Flower).

There is much we can learn—such as to walk, speak, read, do business, or play an instrument. There also is much we receive—such as life itself, challenges, and opportunities. And there is much more that we are able to give, almost infinitely, that we can find just near us—tangible, obvious, waiting.

I consider myself a lucky person. If I had to write down all the reasons for saying that, much time—too much time—would be necessary. Therefore in this article I will concentrate on one reason. It has to do with the Tokyo Foundation and some SYLFF fellows at the University of Music and Performing Arts Vienna, where I’m studying piano in a master’s program.

To receive a SYLFF Fellowship has been a great honor and great financial help for each one of us; but that is not all. Fellowship-related resources, such as the SYLFF Network Program, give rise to creative opportunities too; that is how our SYLFF Network for Music and Arts Vienna (SYNEMAV) came into being. That is how a handful of SYLFF fellows—my co-organizers Monika Guca and David Szalkay, and myself as the principal organizer—had the modest idea of creating something different. How could we combine an expression of our musical art, networking, and initiative to make the world around us a little bit better? The answer was . . . a charity concert.

There are many people in need, we thought, and so we decided to hold a concert for orphan children (I am, by the way, the mother of two children). I began to look for a children’s shelter in my native country, Romania.

I found the Floare de Colt—translated as Noble Flower—Children’s House in Fagaras, a small town in the Transylvanian mountains, about 20 km from the village where I spent my childhood and first touched a piano. The house director, Ms. Cerasela Dogaru, helped me with information and everything else I needed.

We announced our concert for June 24th, 2006. Because I was the vice-chairperson of the OH at our university—and with kind help from our rector—it was possible to arrange for us to use the big Haydn Hall, with a lovely Steinway piano inside, for our concert.

This was the first time for me to organize a concert; usually I “only” play at such events. To organize a concert involves much more to do, but it was pure networking and very instructive for all of us who were involved.

The performers were six SYLFF fellows and one teacher accompanist. Haiyue Yu, a composer, presented her own piano suite; Monika Guca, flutist (and co-organizer), played Toru Takemitsu; Chi Bun Jimmy Chiang, pianist and conductor, played Mozart and Debussy; Tanja Watzinger sang Alban Berg, with piano accompaniment by Eva Mark-Muhlner; David Szalkay, trumpeter (and co-organizer), played Toru Takemitsu and Perz; Adriana Paler-Nicolescu, pianist (and principal organizer), played Liszt. All of us also said a little about ourselves and our pieces before each artistic moment, so that the audience—other SYLFF members, teachers, friend, and music lovers—could be closer to us and better understand the music, some of it very modern. It was a good concert, which means that we felt at home and connected with the audience, which was very warm. We were like a big family in the inspiring atmosphere of the university.

This feeling continued naturally at the buffet afterwards, where we enjoyed delicious food and good conversation, Romanian wine, and Austrian frizzante (semi-sparkling wine). People from many nations joined in a wonderful drop of time.

As a result of the concert we were able to collect a modest sum of money for the children’s shelter; the members of SYNEMAV also made donations themselves. Our imaginations began to work out how best to use the funds to buy presents for 50 children.

We also started a campaign of collecting clothes and toys for the children during the summer; the response was incredible. In November we were ready to start our journey to Romania. My husband Dragos Nicolescu and I needed a Fiat minibus to hold everything that we would be bringing— sweets, oranges, and 15 sacks of clothes and toys—to the orphans. We had to travel almost 12 hours, from Vienna, through Hungary and Transylvania, to get to the shelter.

Haiyue Yu.

Haiyue Yu.

We made our first stop in Lisa, the village of my grandparents. My aunt bought and contributed 50 new, warm hats and an equal number of pairs of gloves for the children, along with delicious Romanian maize chips, and gingerbread. With the help of my 80 year-old grandmother, we packed the presents and prepared ourselves for the next, big day: the visit to the children’s house.

November 24th, 2006, was a normal day for many people, but for me it was a special day, as well as a joyful celebration for the 50 children. They were waiting for us; they welcomed us into their adoptive house and showed us their classrooms and dormitories; they got two hours off from classes to enjoy the presents. They greeted Director Cerasela Dogaru like a mother and us like family. They wanted to help carry the sacks, and they embraced us the entire time.

I had such a mix of feelings, and I had a lump in my throat that just wouldn’t go away. It was amazing to find so much love and warmth in a place that is filled with so many sad stories about children with deceased, ailing, alcoholic, abusive or neglectful parents. There were children who did not know what it was like to have their natural parents next to them; some of them came from families so poor, with such big problems, that they had to be taken care of somewhere else. Some were undergoing physical or psychological therapy. But all of them were nicely dressed, clean, and smiling. They were aged between 7 and 16. And they embraced us like they were seeing Santa Claus bringing Christmas presents.

Each one got a present and a kiss; the kiss was as wanted and as precious as the doll or toy (maybe their first personal one) that each received. To see that somebody, a total stranger, cared about them meant everything to them. That meant they were important, that they were worthy of love just as much as anyone, for no reason. They were children, like so many others, no more and no less.

I will never forget that day. Apart from the photos, newspaper article, and television reportage, there was something that touched my heart and bothered me: these children were so lonely even though it would be so easy for someone to bring a little happiness to them. It requires very little money—only showing a little interest. And it makes one little soul happy. Those orphan children didn’t need things, but human warmth. And they gave it back enormously, in a genuine and moving manner.

We are honored to thank the Tokyo Foundation and SYLFF for helping us to start such activities. And we are happy to announce our next, larger charity concert for the children of Noble Flower Children’s House in Fagaras, Romania, which will take place in the Bosendorfer Hall in Vienna in November 2007.

There is so much to do, more than just to bring little presents. The children need a kitchen and dining room in their own building; they are temporarily eating in a big dining hall that is shared with older people from other facilities in the same complex. Most important, they need someone who has a vision and can create plans for the time when they will be old enough to no longer have the right to live in a children’s shelter. They have the right to have opportunities to obtain jobs, to start their own families, and to pursue happiness, and they will need to know how to fruitfully realize those goals.

Romania has done well in the last 18 years, since the revolution that ended the half-century of Communism and fear. For my native country the year 2007 meant the big step of joining the European Union. But although there is still so much to do, I am sure that help will be found. We just have to be open and to search for it actively, to do our personal best, to follow our important path.

After all, it’s a matter of warmth—giving and manifesting eternal values like careful attention, love, and warmth. Is there anything more important?

Daily Life in Tanzania Improved by JIP Promotion

July 14, 2008
By null

Millions of low-income families in developing countries do not have adequate access to energy, such as electricity, and they must rely on biomass fuels (like wood) to meet their household energy needs.

An estimated 90% of rural people in developing countries rely on biomass fuels as the primary or exclusive source of household energy. Moreover, access to these resources is more difficult in the cities because urban residents, unlike their rural counterparts, cannot hand-collect fuel, and they are too poor to purchase it.

 

A Community Energy Center in Tanzania

Recent studies completed by the Tanzanian NGO Women Development for Science and Technology (WODSTA; see http://www.wodsta.org) and University College of London have shown that poor households in Northern Tanzania spend on average between 20% and 30% of their household budget on biomass fuels (any fuel that comes from biodegradable matter, such as firewood, charcoal, agricultural products, or kerosene) for cooking and lighting - a share significantly higher than comparable high-income households (DPU/CDTI, 2003/04). Although clean and efficient energy sources are available to save money and time while meeting daily energy needs (such as biogas or solar appliances), poor households in the district lack the income needed to access them.

Four Sylff fellows (one each from Kenya and Italy, and two from the United States) joined people from WODSTA in analyzing this problem and developing possible solutions. With funding from the Tokyo Foundation's Joint Initiative Program (JIP), we implemented a community energy initiatives project to address the problem of inadequate access to energy faced by one poor urban population in some wards in Sombetini-Sokoni One, just south of Arusha, in northern Tanzania, East Africa.

The project was designed by the JIP team and WODSTA in order to provide women with energy alternatives in order to help lower spending for household fuel, to improve family health, and to reduce environmental degradation. Primary to the success of the project was the installation of a Community Energy Resources Center (hereinafter "Center") in Sombetini-Sokoni One. The Center is located near a cluster of dukas (shops) on the main dirt road, a place where most villagers pass daily.

The Community Energy Resource Center in Sombetini-Sokoni One.

WODSTA conducted day-to-day project activities at the Center, while the Sylff fellows offered technical support, such as training, helping in assessments, conducting analyses, and conducting monitoring visits of the Center's progress.

Our project is noteworthy because many of the ideas came from the community members themselves. The Center provides a space that residents can visit and where they can watch demonstrations, attend workshops and training programs, and access literature on alternative sources of energy. Among the technologies being promoted are passive solar food dryers and cookers, plant-oil candles and lamps, fuel-less insulated cooking baskets, energy-efficient stoves, and biogas.

Our team focused on mobilizing women and girls, primarily because in a family the females are generally responsible for many of the household activities, such as housekeeping and cooking, that use energy. The project activities centered on educating, involving, empowering, and building capabilities among females, including local leaders, students, and residents. We wanted to increase the confidence of these poor, often underprivileged women, while providing them access to and knowledge about a wide range of energy alternatives.

 

Local Volunteers: The Heart of the Center

During the project's first quarter (April-June 2007), WODSTA conducted a baseline survey, a local volunteer energy committee was elected, and the Community Energy Resource Center was officially opened. The second and third quarters (July-December 2007) saw extensive training coupled with hands-on practice in technology construction by the energy committee (which also serves as the Center's managing board). Each female committee member gained experience and confidence and now serves as an in-house expert regarding one type of energy-saving appliance or alternative fuel.

Community members at a hands-on stove-construction workshop.

The project emphasized outreach to the larger community and building a larger knowledge base concerning the use and availability of appropriate technologies. The outreach included conducting two market studies and extensive student interaction in the community. During the third quarter (October-December 2007), we focused on training the local people in business skills and on ensuring that the Center's sale of appliances and fuels generated a profit, thus enabling the Center to sustain itself beyond the project-funding period.

In the fourth quarter (January-March 2008), we focused on other business-related skills needed by the energy committee to sustain the Center after the JIP project will have ended. The energy committee has gained significant experience, even authoring a constitution for the Center, registering the Center with Tanzania's Office of the Registrar General, and opening a bank account in which the Center's funds are kept.

BASELINE STUDY, MARCH 2007: We began the project by conducting a baseline survey, intending to measure energy usage, community awareness, and acceptance of energy-saving technologies.

The project's aim for the first six months was to increase awareness in Sombetini-Sokoni One of energy-saving technologies and energy-saving fuels. The project succeeded in raising awareness by executing nine public demonstrations, distributing almost 1,000 informational pamphlets and brochures, holding 12 workshops and seminars on the construction and use of energy-saving devices and on gender norms, and by establishing a public space where women and community members can visit to purchase or simply learn about energy-saving technologies.

We subsequently conducted follow-up surveys to determine how attitudes and outcomes had changed since the baseline survey conducted at the beginning of the JIP project. The answers to the questions that were aimed at measuring community awareness of energy alternatives show that during the project implementation period the percentage of community members who were aware of the Center's activities and energy-saving technologies increased substantially. The share of households having awareness of energy-saving technologies rose from 11% at the beginning of the project to 68% at the project's mid-point and 98% by the end of the project year.

MARKET STUDY, SEPTEMBER 2007: During the project's second quarter, we conducted a market study to determine local people's willingness to purchase different technologies at specified prices. The survey helped the Center's leaders determine which technologies and fuels to focus on based on profit margins and demand. The market study also covered existing shops that sold various types of fuels and stoves. With this information, the Center's leaders determined the best locations for advertising and technology-sales activities and sought commitments from owners of specific shops to promote the Center's products.

The study revealed that 41% of the households indicated they were ready to purchase a technology or fuel at the price presented, and 74% of the respondents indicated that they wished to learn more about how the technologies and fuels worked and that they would visit the Center to learn more, while 39% of the respondents saw the technologies as being too expensive compared to traditional fuels.

EFFICACY STUDY, JANUARY 2008: We also measured significant reductions in household budget expenditures and time used for cooking and fuel-collection after new technologies - namely improved stoves - were adopted by families.

The average saving per day when using an energy-saving stove was equal to US$0.25 (a significant amount in a country where the average person lives on US$2.00 per day). As Figure 1 shows, the percent reduction in household money spent on fuel by the families studied was between 21% and 47%, depending on the type of food cooked.

 

Results of the Project

This JIP-sponsored project successfully implemented the Community Energy Resources Center that is still providing energy alternatives to poor urban women and their families. At the end of the project year (April 2008), our JIP team met or exceeded 90% of the project's initial goals. This work has improved our understanding of the barriers that face poor urban families in accessing clean, efficient, and affordable sources of energy. However, we found that two of the project's aims - increasing the percentage of women involved in energy-related decision making, and creating a more-equitable balance in the division of domestic workloads - were difficult to measure quantitatively.

These two aims relate to a sensitive social issue that relates to the cultural and social lifestyle in Tanzania. Although the women we spoke with preferred a greater balance between the genders as regards decision making and domestic roles, these types of social changes might take much longer than one year to achieve. Lacking data, we found that one local mama (woman) did the best job of evaluating the project in relation to the nature of social change within Tanzania's cultural norms:

At the end, the project provided a concrete solution to the problem of energy accessibility in poor urban neighborhoods. It created a place where people can purchase and construct affordable, clean, and efficient technologies. It directly improves both the health of the women who are responsible for cooking and the local and regional environments. The localization of clean-technology production brings a huge benefit to northern Tanzania, because it reduces the cost of technology production and provides accessible energy alternatives to even the poorest households.

Average Amount of Fuel Used for Cooking

Graham, Stuart

Sylff Fellow
Stuart Graham is the Kauffman Foundation Fellow in Law and Social Science at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, and is an assistant professor of strategic management in the College of Management, Georgia Institute of Technology.

Mutiso, Stephen

Sylff Fellow
Stephen Mutiso is a program officer with the international donor agency Trocaire in Nairobi, Kenya.

Oursler, Anna

Sylff JIP project member
Anna Oursler is a student in the Department of Environmental and Urban Planning at the University of California, Berkeley, currently working with Women Development for Science and Technology (WODSTA) in Arusha, Tanzania, East Africa

 

Message from the Tokyo Foundation:Why don't you write an article too?

“Voices from the Sylff Community” is a space showcasing the activities and opinions of Sylff fellows and faculty members. We have received contributions from fellows and faculty members all over the world.　We are looking forward to sharing YOUR voices with people around the world, including global issues with local perspective, grassroots issues requiring global attention, and your first-hand experience.
For further details, please click here

Climate Change Response at a Crossroads

July 14, 2008
By null

CER-based trading of emissions rights has long-term implications for global political and economic power distribution and raises ethical questions about ownership of the right to use the atmosphere.

Globally as well as nationally, we are all at a crossroads. From Rio to Bali, we made efforts to build alternative institutional arrangements for international cooperation to address the problem of climate change. Over these years several positive steps have emerged, but real-world action is still far from the desired level (IPCC 2007, Stern 2007). There has been a marked jump in media coverage on climate change since 2007, but there is a need for further action. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) suggests differentiated responsibilities in mitigation due to differences in levels of fossil-fuel-based economic activity.

In the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, countries were grouped into Annex I and non-Annex I countries. Annex I are the OECD countries with high emissions, which were asked to meet reduction targets. Developing nations with lower fossil fuel consumption were grouped as non-Annex I countries and exempted from meeting targets. This arrangement recognized the reality that GHG emissions stay in the atmosphere for more than 100 years; Annex I countries, which have been using fossil fuels since the Industrial Revolution, have largely been responsible for the stockpiling of GHGs in the atmosphere.

Though the Kyoto arrangement seemed logical, it was not ratified by such large emitters as the United States and Australia. And the free-riding attitude of the big emitters failed to induce cooperative solutions to the problem. To prompt action, there must be promises of a reward for the actions taken.

 

Reassessment of the CDM

The Clean Development Mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol is probably the only platform to coordinate the actions of both developed and developing countries toward a common cause by accommodating differentiated responsibilities and the need for incentives. Under this mechanism, an Annex I country is allowed to locate mitigation projects or buy emission reduction credits from developing countries to achieve its Kyoto emission reduction target. Developing countries, meanwhile, benefit from investment and technology transfer, helping their economies to grow on a low carbon pathway - a characteristics of sustainable development. A reassessment of this mechanism makes good sense, as the Kyoto negotiated period will be reviewed from 2009 with a view beyond 2012.

The CDM requires that greenhouse gas reductions from mitigation projects be calculated using a counterfactual baseline that approximates emissions levels without the project. Estimating GHG reductions is a multiple-step process (Sathaye et al. 2003), including (1) determination of additionality or eligibility of a project, (2) construction of a baseline approximating emissions levels that would have occurred without the project, (3) adjustment of the baseline to account for free riders, (4) calculation of project emissions, (5) adjustment of these calculations for potential leakage, and finally, (6) estimation of GHG reductions relative to the baseline.

Additionally, the estimated baseline may be subject to adjustment periodically to reflect changes in business-as-usual conditions. In order to receive credits for reducing GHG emissions within a given carbon trading scheme, a project may be subjected to additionality or eligibility tests (step 1) before being accepted as a qualified project. These tests are designed to ensure that a proposed project will result in real emission reductions.

 

Trading of CERs

This reassessment of the CDM will not discuss in detail the actual mechanism of certified emissions reductions or challenge its concept. Here, the objective is to highlight two issues associated with CERs that are not well understood, discussed, or researched. When CERs are introduced to an existing socio-political-economic landscape, they represent a completely new "good." It follows from the basic concept that if emissions are "bad" and impose costs on the society, then emission reductions are good and produce benefits. The production of such "good" primary products as power, steel, cement also leads to the generation of undesired emissions.

Suppose a 6 MW power generation project in India proposes to use rice husks as a new fuel by taking advantage of new technology. The goal of the project would be to replace coal, a fuel with high carbon content. Suppose, this project can reduce 40,000 tons of CO2 annually compared to a coal-fired plant. The project would then be eligible for 40,000 CERs while producing 6 MW of power. Like power, CERs can be exchanged and traded on the market. However, given the location of the project in developing countries with no Kyoto-related constraints, the 40,000 CERs generated by the project can now be sold to Annex I investors (although this is not automatic and requires a lengthy process, as mentioned above).

Under the Kyoto regime, Annex I countries with binding reduction targets may require such CERs to achieve their goals. Thus the Annex I countries represent the demand side of the CER market and non-Annex I countries the suppliers. The price of CERs will be determined by the relative market supply and demand. Given the voluntary nature of participation under the Kyoto regime, at present the size of the market is small. With the nonparticipation of large emitters, moreover, the demand is extremely small, keeping the price of CERs at very low levels. As of March 2008 total CERs issued globally were 121,122,134 metric tons (CO2 equivalent) and the price varied from 7 euros to 22 euros per metric ton. This is not to argue how the price situation can be improved but rather to show the implications of owning CERs.

 

Ownership of Global Natural Capital

CERs may be owned by any party. A unique characteristic of CERs is that their ownership effectively provides ownership over global natural capital, that is, the right to use the atmosphere. In simple terms, a new capital good is being introduced, ownership of which will result in global market power in the near future, not unlike knowledge capital and physical capital. Creation of such rights or ownership has both long-term implications for global political and economic power distribution and crucial ethical implications. Unless regulated within a target emission level, the creation of CERs will distort climate stabilization, market power and world order.

Non-Annex I countries like India and China that are market leaders with large supplies of CERs and no binding mitigation target under the Kyoto Protocol have little incentive to hold onto their CERs and may wind up squandering ownership over natural capital now and forever. There may even come a time when they will have to buy back those same CERs at a higher price at a later date.

No study exists to show whether countries lose or gain as late entrants in the market. But it can be predicted that they will forfeit an early mover's advantage despite their high potential. In the longer run this is going to be an issue of ownership of natural capital and global commons. Under the circumstances it makes good sense for non-Annex I countries to take up binding emission targets both from an efficiency and equity point of view.

 

Ethical Issues

But deeper issues must also be discussed. One is the ethical question of managing a global common property through inappropriately defined private ownership. Who will own the rights to a global common good? Should it be individual investors, banks, financial institutions, governments, or all future generations of humans on Earth? Ownership by one group, by definition, excludes that by others for the same resource. So under current CDM arrangements, the sellers of CERs are by implication selling off their rights to use a global common property without any institutional arrangement with symmetric information on defined ownership.

High transaction costs, limited market size due to the absence of a cap for non-Annex I countries, large-scale uncertainty on ownership type, lifetime of the market, and what happens beyond Kyoto are all inviting attention to reassess the CDM and CER market. The current state of affairs can be considered a period of learning and experimentation. Asymmetry in information and the ethical issue of providing a "global good" for private trading is bound to generate global conflict sooner or later unless the CDM is crafted properly. The learning process combined with new knowledge can pave the way toward global target setting and a binding target for all whereby each player can choose its role on a level paying ground. This will ensure efficiency as well as equity, but ethical questions will still remain unresolved. Neither does it solve the problem of free riding in the Kyoto regime. There is thus still a long way to go in finding a nondistorting solution.

 

Concluding Remarks

It is time to understand that GHG emissions reduction is an economic activity. It makes good business sense to invest in the low-carbon development pathway. However, without a limit to emissions generation, the CDM will limit participation and distort the situation. A new regime is needed to replace the emphasis on voluntary action. Binding targets needs to be taken up by each emitter, however small or large, from the viewpoints of efficiency and equity.

Targets may be decided by nation-states and negotiated within the global goal of stabilizing emission levels. Under any circumstances, there is a need to coordinate national priorities and goals with those of the international community. Although nation-states are free to decide their own national policies, it can be predicted that those who benefit will be those who can best coordinate national and global goals.

The views presented in this article are of the author and in no way represent those of her country of origin, India, or the IPCC.

References

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007). "Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change." Working Group III contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Cambridge University Press.

Sathaye, J., Scott Murtishaw, Lynn Price, Maurice Lefranc, Joyashree Roy, Herald Winkler, and Randall Spalding-Fecher (2003). "Multiproject Baselines for Evaluation of Electric Power Projects," Energy Policy, Vol. 32/11 pp 1303-17.

Stern N. (2007). "The Economics of Climate Change." The Stern Review. London: Cambridge University Press.

 

Message from the Tokyo Foundation:Why don't you write an article too?

“Voices from the Sylff Community” is a space showcasing the activities and opinions of Sylff fellows and faculty members. We have received contributions from fellows and faculty members all over the world.　We are looking forward to sharing YOUR voices with people around the world, including global issues with local perspective, grassroots issues requiring global attention, and your first-hand experience.
For further details, please click here