Comments

Poor people are the first to suffer from climate change consequences and children are the ones who suffer the most. They live in vulnerable places and are least able to protect themselves from the effects and to recover from climatic disasters. Poor children are the most vulnerable to die from tropical diseases. They lose their homes and many times their dear ones when submitted to flooding or drought.
Climate change effects destroy social investments and elevate international tensions over natural resources.
That is why we in World Vision advocate that climate change is much more than an environmental issue. It is fundamentally a development and a moral problem that must be faced by everyone.
For more details:
http://www.worldvision.com.au/Issues/Climate_Change.aspx

I think it is about time that we stop building on those places as we are destroying a lot of wildlife. I would love to do any thing I can to help the earth, the sea, and the wildlife. 

Since coming to work for the Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide a year ago, I have been amazed at the human/nature connection that our partners around the world work tirelessly to protect.
It is the interconnection that is so important to respect and preserve. I think that is what Kelly and Priscila's project captures so well....

Rita Radostitz
ELAW
check out our blog: http://elawspotlight.wordpress.com or visit our website: www.elaw.org

I have been an environmentalist for 22 years now. I have called myself a human rights defender for 22 years too. But until last the two conferences I attended with Priscila Néri, the author of the above post, I constantly found it difficult to articulate why and how I could be both and why I felt the discipline of human rights could not be separated from the environment. I believe Priscila's blog articulates it well and that interview footage we will be uploading in celebration of Earth Day will articulate even further and in am increasingly convincing way, why environmental rights and human rights are one in the same.

I also wanted to advocate for global participation in the climate crisis by highlighting two figures from the UN that Priscila sites to in the blog as well as adding a third:
-- The UN estimates that there will be 50 million climate refugees by 2010 - that's next year;
-- According to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, this number could reach 1 billion by 2050; and
-- And former NASA scientist James Lovelock is even less optimistic, "Humans are in a pretty difficult position and I don't think they are clever enough to handle what's ahead. I think they'll survive as a species all right, but the cull during this century is going to be huge," he says. "The number remaining at the end of the century will probably be a billion or less." (or in other words,  a loss of 5-7 billion human lives).

I know, predictions are just that, predictions. They may not come true but the top minds in the world are working on this, the science they are uncovering is powerful and the human rights violations that will follow if the science is right, will be catastrophic. So to this end, given the human rights implications caused by the climate crisis -- everything from crop failures and hunger to storms, from drought and lack of water to forced migration, from loss of homelands to increased disease primarily from water bourne pathogens --  I would just like to ask that each us us support all the efforts we possibly can to contribute to the human rights movement surrounding the climate crisis in time for December's climate talks in Copenhagen.

And another good read . . .  Feb 25, 2009, New Scientist at:  http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126971.700-how-to-survive-the-co...

Kelly Matheson/North America Program Coordinator WITNESS

Thanks for your comment, Frederique. I do agree with you - nature deserves our utmost respect and care. The point I'm trying to make is that humans and nature are interconnected. In my view, both the human rights movement and the environmental movement could be doing a better job of establishing that link.... perhaps people that are not active in either of the causes would be more inclined to think about the importance of animals and trees if they understood how closely their own livelihoods depended on it... And, yes, all causes matter! As my grandpa would always tell me: "toda forma de resistir vale a pena" ("every form of resistance is valid!") Cheers, Priscila

I'm sorry, I don't understand, what's wrong with "saving whales and butterflies for the sake of nature itself"?
Why does the human being have to be the ultimate goal? We, wonderful, superior human beings have damaged so much so fast, in the name of profit at all cost, in the name of that sense that the Earth and whatever is on it belongs to Mankind... Beyond the fact that we belong (not own) in this planet and therefore must sustain and respect it in order to have a home tomorrow, we have a duty to "repair" as much as we can, for the sake of it. When you rescue a dog that has been starved to the point that there are only bones and skin left, you do it for the dog. When you participate to an action against the skinning alive of cats, dogs and other animals in China, you do it so that no other animal will have to suffer this atrocity. Just for that. What is more horrible? Children being abducted and drugged to serve as soldiers, animals being slaughtered in the name of fashion, women being stoned for adultery...? Each person who chooses a cause, does so according to his or her sensitivity. No cause is more or less important than another, they all matter.
Happy Women's Day.
Frederique Pommarat