The Interview (finally!)

The very messy and scrambled notes from the meeting are as follows:

We interviewed the Head of Staff in Latin America (Darcy ____?, about 3 people working under her)

• The organization as a whole has approx. 75 staff
• 3 in Europe, 3 in Latin American (Bolivia, Mexico City)

Quote from Darcy: "The world needs band-aids, but..." FWW does not get directly involved (wells, etc.), FWW in more interested in helping *local* leadership so that they can help themselves. "Everything needs to be locally driven or it won't work."
FWW notes that different regions don't work the same way (cultural, political, resource issues)

• ex: colonialism in Africa has encouraged accepting European/American donations instead of creating sustainable measures
  

• possible title for project: Not a Band-aid (?)

focused on sustainability

FWW goes where there's momentum. they won't start something out of nothing
***FWW GOALS AND MISSION***

• encourage transparency, public engagement, sustainable measures that are supported by local leadership, not outsiders
• "organize the organized" like churches, unions, etc. works through pre-existing networks
  

FWW has worked extensively in Bolivia (Cochabamba) with an organization known as La Red Vida (Laredvida.org).

• approximately 1,000,000+ metropolitan population
• Access to water in Northern Cochabamba approx. 90%
• Access to water in Southern Cochabamba less than 50%

La Red Vida:

• FWW works with the Red Vida network, UN, Right to Water (?) groups
• La Red Vida fights privatization (in Bolivia)
• however, often shifts instead from privatization to commercialization, which isn't necessarily better
• La Red Vida and FWW mandate cost recovery (see http://www.waterandfood.ifpri.org/pubs/200311conf/presentations/varelaortega.pdf for more information about cost recovery?)
• " cross subsidization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_subsidization, http://www.joycemeng.com/writings/water.pdf)

Privatization:

• WB pushes privatization. Privatization "feeds corruption, brings in outsiders who don't know the community"

FWW and the UN:

• Darcy, speaking for FWW, thinks working with the UN is good. FWW sees the value in the UN and working "democratically" with 144 nation states

With the UN, FWW works on the UN level, the regional level (Red Vida, Water Africa (?)), and at the local level

• Have people sitting on a UN body who work together-->gives Red Vida funding for the "Pups Platform" -->funds an office in Columbia -->facilitates the building of pups/pumps(?) throughout the Americas
  

**FWW notes the powerful tool of sharing knowledge about what works with others who are facing the same water scarcity challenges

**Public-Public Partnerships

• new thing FWW is working on to share the best practives
• policy, management, technology
• between a successful company and a not-so-successful company (mentorship?)
  

Note: look at Uruguay. Consitutionalized public rights to water
For more specifics about Cochabamba email Marcella at Molivera@fwwatch.org
Also, see the fact sheet on the FWW website about human rights to water

notes on Consumer rights/economic failures in United States v. human rights abroad

• people don't think human rights violations exist in the United States. appalachia
• is there a reason?
• the use of language here and abroad

suez, violia

FWW - Days 1&2

I thought it would also be beneficial for us to post any notes that we take about our sessions as a reference tool for when we create our final report. Please add anything you remember in a separate post or in comments!

Day 1 - 1/26/2011
My initial perceptions of FWW didn't perfectly align with what I had expected. For whatever reason, I anticipated a relatively high level of formality, particularly from the employees. Yet as soon as we met Katy, I was surprised by her casual demeanor--and dress. Fortunately, I think I much preferred her to be relatable and welcoming. I also believe that her disposition parallels the character of Food and Water Watch itself. As Katy shared with us, "We are learning as we go." It seems that a vast majority of the employees at FWW are young (25-35), like the organization itself, which according to their website is in its fifth year. (It would be interesting for us to get the actual data for the age/demographics of their workforce, and maybe also ask Katy about the founding of FWW).

Katy also briefly outlined FWW's areas of expertise and interest: water privatization, food, and interestingly enough, fish. She mentioned that a lot of their initiatives take place at the grass roots level and strongly emphasize online activism, as well.

And then, as we all know, we were promptly set to work databasing and stuffing envelopes relating to the Farm Bill. While I expected some amount of menial busy-work and paper-shuffling on our first day, I don't believe we expected it on the second day.

Day 2 - 2/2/2011
It was somewhat disheartening to once again be ushered into a conference room laden with packets of paper, envelopes, tape, and staplers. However, once a member of the group (Elana?) articulated our eagerness to interview employees and move beyond pencil-pushing to take full advantage of this real-life resource, Katy stated at the end of our time there that she would be happy to look at our questions and pass them on to any of FWW's researchers. Ideally, next week will include answers and possibly a meeting with some of the experts at FWW.

Email to Katy Kiefer

I sent the following email to Katy at FWW earlier this evening. Please let me know if you think anything needs modification or if you have additional questions you'd like to include. Also, I'm not sure if we all have her email, so just in case here it is for future reference: kkiefer@fwwatch.org.

Hi Katy!

Thank you so much for offering to give us further insight on FWW and the issues it seeks to ameliorate. We have truly enjoyed working with your organization so far, and we're so grateful that you've welcomed us. 

I wanted to give you a brief summary of our research project, in addition to the questions we have for FWW specifically. I hope that this will clarify what we hope to accomplish this semester, but should you have any questions, please feel free to email me about anything. Through our research project, we would like to explore the current state of water distribution/availability and the issues surrounding it within Africa; we noticed on your website that you mention Namibia, South Africa, and Tanzania as nations that have caught your attention. Essentially, we hope to understand how FWW approaches the issues plaguing these countries and evaluate their effectiveness. We would also like to learn how FWW implements these actions; for example, how FWW interacts with the U.S. government, foreign governments, other NGOs, and the local people to ensure the success of its endeavors.

The following list includes the questions we're curious about, and any insight you can provide us with would be much appreciated.

1. What is the history of water issues in Africa?
2. How many people are in this area (for example, in Namibia, South Africa, and Tanzania)? What percentage has access to clean water?
3. What actions does FWW take to ameliorate water issues in Africa (specifically, in Namibia, South Africa, and Tanzania)?
4. What action do you consider the most important, or which issue are you most passionate about/active in?
5. How does FWW consider the culture of the people in Africa (specifically in Namibia, South Africa, and Tanzania) when making decisions on how to act?
6. Is FWW held accountable by any outside, overarching government, transnational, or humanitarian groups? (For example, the U.S. government, the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, etc.)
7. How does FWW publicize statistics, results, and evaluations of its performance?

8. What does FWW do with these publications and its findings on the water crisis in Africa? Does it seek to spread the word in the United States, or in Africa as well?

9. Who does FWW appeal to as it advocates for water issues in Africa? U.S. citizens? U.S. government? International governments?

10. How do you decide which regions of Africa to focus on/provide aid for?

11. What obstacles does FWW confront as it tries to implement its policy and help in Africa?

Again, thank you so much Katy! We would absolutely love it if we could set up meetings with any of your researchers to hopefully find answers to all of the above questions. Have a great weekend! See you next week!

All the best,

Julie Ogonis

Summary of Lake Naivasha: Withering Under the Assault of International Flower Vendors

A Food and Water Watch publication:

Kenya's Lake Naivasha used to be pristine, but due to overuse of water and environmental destruction caused by an overload of international flower farms, the lake's condition is deteriorating.

There are over 30 flower farms that cause many problems, the most worrying of which are the loss of water and the unsustainable increase in population due to an influx of labor.

Due to "virtual water trade," the process of using your water to produce or grow what you export, Kenya (and Lake Naivasha) has lost a lot of water. Scientists have concluded that Naivasha's water levels are 10 ft. lower than what is healthy.

In addition, over the past 2 years, the number of hippos has dropped by more than 25% because of decreased water levels.

Besides adverse environmental effects, the flower farms have attracted an unsustainable labor pool. The population rose from 7000 in 1969 to 300,000 in 2007. The population around the lake has no access to sewage facilities, and the people are washing in the lake. Furthermore, the flower farm workers are suffering from chemical exposure (one can imagine what is being poured into the lake).

Kenya is a "begging country," on the top 10 list of the World Food Program for food donations, but Lake Naivasha has the potential to grow enough food to feed the surrounding area.

The Maasai people used to graze their cattle along Lake Naivasha's banks, but in 1904 the Maasai agreed to clear out so that ranchers could move in. Now, the land around the lake is privately owned by the flower farms. Without lake access, poor residents have to get their water from communal taps and the Maasai can only let their cows graze at a small section of bank where women wash clothes and animals bathe.

The government is between a rock and a hard place: the agricultural expansion in Naivasha (and elsewhere in Kenya) is helping the GDP and economy grow, but there are adverse effects to the population and surrounding area that need to be curbed.

In 1995, Lake Naivasha was protected under the Ramsar Convention (preserving wetlands as habitats for wildfowl), but the Ramsar designation doesn't have enough legal power to carry out tasks.

There is no legal framework for the use of water from Lake Naivasha, and unless the government curbs use, the lake could dry out. The government may be blinded by the earnings of the flower industry ($350 million/year).

Food and Water Watch proposes sustainable alternatives to the flower farms including: small-scale organic farming and ecotourism. This would protect both the lake and the livlihoods of the surrounding communities. Small-scale organic farming would promote food security, and ecotourism would bring more local and foreign vistors (and their cash). Both would cause little to no damage to the environment.

Citations used by FWW and mentioned in this summary:

1. Ouma Oloo, Isaac. Personal Interview. Activist and ecological safari guide. Aug. 30, 2007.
2. "Lake Naivash: Local Management of a Kenyan Ramsar Site." The World Conservation Union and Lake Naivasha Riparian Association. 2005.
   
3. Hartley, Jean. "Naivasha." 1985. Evans Brothers (Kenya) Ltd. Pp. 4,9.
4. Smith, Lewis. "Why fruit shopping poisons the hippo." The Times, March 28, 2006. Available at: www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2106467,00.html
5. Vasagar, Jeevan. "How Kenya is caught on the thorns of Britain's love affair with the rose." The Guardian. Feb. 13, 2006. Available at: www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1708492,00.html
6. "Valentine's Day roses bloom amid Kenyan poverty." Reuters news service, Feb. 13, 2006. Available at: www.planetark.com/dailynewstory.cfm/newsid/35048/newDate/13-Feb-2006/story.htm
7. "Five major flower firms to abandon Naivasha for Ethiopia." NationMesdia.com, Feb. 22, 2006.
   

Questions to ask Kate

• What are some of the current projects of FWW in Africa, involving access to clean water?
• What are some of the past projects of FWW in Africa, involving access to clean water?

• Who would be available for us to interview (for about 15-30 minutes) in FWW involving access to clean water?
• Is it possible for us to "sit in" on a meeting involving access to clean water?
• Is there any other way for us to get more involved in the FWW to aid to our research?

• What are some of the positive aspects of FWW? What are some of the negative aspects of FWW?
• Have you noticed any common failures? Have you noticed any common successes?