today. This is a third dimension which should make the debate over the future of the environment less acrimonious; rather, it should challenge everyone everywhere to join in the fight to stem the negative slide in global weather conditions

To a large extent, the study by Sir Nicholas Stern, which was released last week, serves as a pointer that it makes economic sense to act decisively to fight the threat of global warming.  He counseled in his report that "global warming could shrink the global economy by 20 per cent. But taking action now would cost just 1 per cent of global gross domestic product (GDP)." This should encourage those who for their national economic interests hinder global initiatives against global warming, as the risk of not acting presents a consequence of a greater magnitude, for the future generation.

Apart from the estimated economic cost of taking the right actions to curb global environmental degradation, inconclusive scientific evidence that links human activities to global warming had provided a shield for global inertia concerning preservation of the environment. The study by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a United Nations group, tends to have removed this shield last Friday, when it released its much anticipated report. Regarded as the most comprehensive study on climate change, the leading international network of climate change scientists concluded for the first time that global warming is "unequivocal" and that human activity is the main driver, "very likely" causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950.

The combination of these two studies provides insights into the grim economic outlook the world risks, if no positive action is taken. Some of the highlights of the IPCC report are that:

• It is very likely that hot extremes, heat waves and heavy precipitation events will continue to become more frequent
  
  
• Temperatures to rise by about 3.2 to 7.2 degrees by the end of the century
  
  
• Sea levels rising 7 to 23 inches by 2100, but oceans could rise much faster if ice sheets rapidly disappear
  
  
• "Likely" that areas to be affected by drought will increase
  
  
• "Very likely" that warm spells / heat waves frequency increases will occur over most land areas

The potential economic consequences of the projections, according to Nicholas Stern, a former World Bank Chief Economist, are that:

• Up to 200 million people could become refugees as their homes are hit by drought or flood
  
  
• Melting glaciers could cause water shortages for 1 in 6 of the world's population
  
  
• Wildlife will be harmed; at worst up to 40% of species could become extinct
  
  
• Droughts may create tens or even hundreds of millions of "climate refugees"

Where is Nigeria in this scenario? It is pretty easy to see even if the content of the report released for policy makers and the composition of the researchers show that the African continent generally has very residual influence on global study of this magnitude.

As already disclosed by experts, with more than 90 percent confidence, carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases from human activities are the drivers of global warming since mid-20th century. "Unfettered" burning of coal and oil (i.e. gas flaring), fossil fuel burning and tropical deforestation are very well known human and economic activities in Nigeria that are listed among factors that precipitate the change in weather conditions of the world.

Apart from environmental hazards related to oil exploration activities, and, perhaps, deforestation, the low industrialization in the country ordinary would take the attention of the global study from Nigeria, like other low-income countries of the world. But this does not shield Nigeria and other LICs from the deleterious weather conditions the world fears, both for today and the future.

In "Environmental Statistics: Situation in Federal Republic Of Nigeria", a country report which was presented by Messrs M. A. Adeyinka and P. O. Bankole,  at the Workshop on Environment Statistics held in Dakar, Senegal in 2005, the following were presented as critical concerns for Nigeria:

• Sheet, gully, coastal and marine erosions, including land subsidence particularly in the coastal areas are common place
  
  
• Coastal, river, and urban flooding exit in different parts of the country
  
  
• Drought and desertification
  
  
• Oil pollution from spills, oil well blow-outs, oil ballast discharges and improper disposal of drilling mud from petroleum prospecting, result in problems such as: the loss of the aesthetic values of natural beaches due to unsightly oil slicks; damage to marine wildlife, modification of the ecosystem through species elimination and the delay in biota (fauna and flora) succession; and decrease in fishery resources
  
  
• Urban decay and squatter settlements
  
  
• Hazards from industrial waste, pollution and municipal solid waste
  
  
• Various non-biodegradable household petrochemical products such as polythene bags, plastic containers, styrofoam packages and tyres litter Nigerian cities, and about 80 million litres of crankcase oil is discharged carelessly into drains and ground surfaces in the cities from mechanic workshops, industries, power stations and commercial houses
  
  
• Loss of Fauna and Flora

In addition to the above, whereas government's bureaucracy at both Federal and State levels in the area of the environment has expanded in the last few years, it is not observable that their efforts at fighting environmental degradation in the country are coherent and mutually re-inforcing. In spite of the campaign of credibility that authorities have taken to the media regarding their environmental projects, there is no set agenda that is systematically diffused to the populace to modify their disposition towards preserving the environment.

These recent reports should stir up civil society groups and NGOs towards environmental activism, as popularly seen in the western countries. There is the need to place before authorities demand for good policies on the environment, while surveilance of industrial practices of Nigerian corporates should heighten, while citizens should modify their behaviours that impact negatively on the environment.

During the Annual Meeting of the IMF/World Bank in Singapore last September, Financialnigeria.com engaged some members of the investors community present at the country event hosted by the Nigerian government delegates. A number of those interviewed considered a clean environment as a key factor in deciding the destination of their investment.

This is a small lesson for all that winning the environment challenge has great economic gain. The present generation also needs to act responsibly such that it does not jeopardize the existence of the future generation in a "prosperous" but uninhabitable earth.

Financialnigeria.com Report
February 05, 2007