For those who don’t vote in the US because they think it’s too time-consuming, too complicated or too confusing, consider the voting process in the African nation of Burundi.

Burundi, for the Africa-map-challenged, like me, is landlocked country. It’s that little red dot on the map between Rwanda to the north, Tanzania to the east and southeast, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the west. Lake Tanganyika lies along its southwestern border. Its capital cities are Bjumbura ( the political capital) and Gitega (the economic capital). Burund’s population is about 11 million. The country’s literacy rate is 68 percent. It operates politically as a constitutional republic with a bi-cameral parliamentary structure. Currently, 24 different political parties hold seats or are vying for them.

And that’s where the complexity sets in. According to the Electoral Institute for Sustainable Democracy in Africa [EISA], in parliamentary elections, each valid voter is given 24 ballots – each bearing the name and symbol of a different party – and two envelopes. In the polling booth, the voter puts her chosen ballot paper in the white envelope, and the rest into the black one. Exiting the booth, voters then put the white envelope with their chosen ballot paper into one box for votes cast, and the black envelope into another box, before having their thumbs marked with indelible ink so they can’t vote again. The number of black envelopes containing useless ballot papers (at any given polling station) have to match with the number of white envelopes to avoid cheating.

I have now read that description about a dozen times, and I think I’m beginning to understand it. But still, I’m glad I’m not a first-time voter in Burundi.

Burundi is slated to hold a presidential election on May 20. 2020. With six candidates vying for the job, voting will presumably be somewhat simpler than the complicated routine of parliamentary elections, and the current ruling party is expected, by knowledgeable observers, to win the day. Notably, other African nations have postponed their national elections due to the coronavirus pandemic, but as of this writing, Burundi is moving ahead.

The post How to vote in Burundi appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Togo is not Tonga. I had not thought about either of those tiny nations until, literally, yesterday, when I wrote a post about a Peace Corps volunteer in Tonga. I didn’t know where these countries were, and I’m not sure I knew which was which, or even if one or both of them was a mythical, invented, Wakanda-esque place that occurs only in literature, comic books, movies or bedtime stories. I only became lightly acquainted with Tonga because of my personal connection to that Peace Corps volunteer, and I wondered, as I wrote that post, what other places I was missing out on because I had no perceived connection to them. I find myself embarrassed by my ignorance and ethnocentrism. So today, I’m calling my own bluff and looking into Togo, simply because it sounds a little like Tonga, and because I need to be more curious. Here are some things I’ve learned and impressions I’ve formed — not claiming to be comprehensive:

Basics: Togo’s capital city is Lome. It’s one of the smallest countries in Africa, covering just 57,000 square miles, making it about the size of Georgia. It has a population of about 7.6 million. [That may not sound very small, but remember how big Africa is by comparison: 11.74 million square miles.]

The history of Togo is a familiar, sad story of colonization and exploitation by European powers. Starting in the 1500s, and for the following 200 years, the area was a major trading center for Europeans in search of slaves, earning Togo and the surrounding region the name, “The Slave Coast.”

Germany established “Togoland” as a colony in 1884, toward the end of the period of European colonization in Africa generally known as the “Scramble for Africa,” according to Wikepedia. 

More than once, what is now Togo was divvied up and passed around, without permission. In World War I, both Great Britain and France invaded, to vanquish the Germans. They “got” Togoland as reparations from Germany at the end of the war. Later, when they couldn’t agree on joint rule, they split Togoland between themselves. After World War II, citizens of the British sector voted to become part of Ghana. Citizens on the French side opted to become an independent republic of France, and gained independence, as Togo, in 1961.

Unfortunately, Togo’s more recent history is an ugly saga of democracy denied—the kind of story that adds credence to the unfortunate stereotype of corrupt, despotic African leaders. Togo’s first elected leader ran a dictatorship disguised as a democracy—and retained power for 38 years, making him the longest ruling dictator in modern Africa. When he died suddenly, in 2005, the Togolese military installed his son as the head of government. The son was re-elected in 2010 and 2015, in elections that were widely regarded as rigged, sparking violent demonstrations that caused hundreds of deaths and causing as many as 40,000 Togolese citizens to flee to neighboring countries. A legislative election in January 2018 sparked more protests, as 14 opposition parties boycotted the vote. The country’s struggle to democratize has resulted in on-again-off-again sanctions from the European Union and denunciations from human rights organizations.

But it’s not all bad in Togo. Its citizens have a relatively decent standard of living, thanks mostly to the country’s valuable phosphate deposits. Togo is the world’s fifth largest exporter of phosphates, which are used in a huge range of everyday products, such as pharmaceuticals, personal care products, industrial and institutional cleaners.

Also, a nascent entrepreneurial spirit has emerged around the Lome port—one of the largest in Western Africa—where 500,000 tons of mostly European e-waste arrive every year. Local innovators scrounge the piles of dead computers, printers and tvs for parts and precious metals, sometimes MacGyver-ing them into working equipment for resale. It’s ironic, of course, that the same countries that pillaged Togo for centuries are once again exploiting it—this time as a dumping ground for electronics.

The latest news headlines from Togo point to an improving economic picture, sparked by improvements to Lome port. In fact, Lome now hosts West Africa’s leading container port, snatching the position from Lagos ports in Nigeria in the last quarter of 2018. On the flip side, other recent events have echoes to Togo’s past, when slave ships used Lome as a hub. In early March 2019, pirates—whose nationality has yet to be determined—seized a container ship near the port and kidnapped three Romanian sailors.

I wish there was a positive ending to this story. But there’s not. Every year, the BBC conducts a “Happiness Survey,” ranking countries “based on data from the Gallup World Poll and taking into account variables such as the real GDP per capita, healthy life expectancy, corruption levels and social freedoms.” In 2015, the study ranked Togo as the saddest nation in the world.

The post Togo: another country I know nothing about appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Recently, many of us learned that the US has troops stationed in Niger and in other African nations. The news came as a surprise to many—not the least of whom was Sen. Lindsay Graham [R-SC], who is a long-time member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and who often touts his credentials as a foreign policy wonk.

“I didn’t know there was 1,000 troops in Niger,” Graham told NBC’s Chuck Todd on Meet the Press. “They are going to brief us next week as to why they were there and what they were doing.”

It has to make you wonder: Where else in Africa does the US have troops? How many are there? And what is their mission?

One person who seems to know a great deal about this subject is Nick Turse, who writes at Tom Dispatch.com, and who published a book in 2015 called Tomorrow’s Battlefield: US Proxy Wars and Secret Ops in Africa. A summary of the book says:

You won’t see segments about it on the nightly news or read about it on the front page of America’s newspapers, but the Pentagon is fighting a new shadow war in Africa, helping to destabilize whole countries and preparing the ground for future blowback. Behind closed doors, U.S. officers now claim that “Africa is the battlefield of tomorrow, today.”

What is AFRICOM?

The US military presence is not new. US troops have been stationed in African nations since 2007, mostly as part of Special Operations units. They are overseen by U.S. Africa Command [AFRICOM], a unit that is only now, in light of the recent ambush in Niger, beginning to get press coverage. AFRICOM’s headquarters is in Stuttgart, Germany, rather than in Africa, because, according to an NPR report, “While many African nations welcome the U.S. assistance, they aren’t interested in a high-profile U.S. presence.”

Much of the US’s engagement in African nations comes by way of Joint Combined Exchange Training, known informally as JCET missions. The budget for these operations in Africa has been growing in recent years, and that budget escalation reflects a steady rise in the number of special operations forces deployed in African nations.

According to CBS News,

The US has roughly 800 military personnel temporarily deployed to Niger, and roughly 6,000 military personnel spread across the continent.

Turse reports that on average,

Special Operations are “routinely engaged in about half of Africa’s 54 nations… Special Operations Command Africa [SOCAFRICA], is busy year round in 22 partner nations.”

As an example of the scope of US presence, U.S. Special Operations forces conducted 20 JCETs in Africa during 2014, according to documents obtained from SOCOM.  These missions were carried out in 10 countries, up from eight a year earlier.  Four took place in both Kenya and Uganda; three in Chad; two in both Morocco and Tunisia; and one each in Djibouti, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, and Tanzania.

A few nations host the bulk of US military personnel. CBS News reports that:

Djibouti is one of the world’s smallest countries, but it currently hosts more US military personnel than any other African nations. Roughly 4,000 U.S. military personnel on the continent are temporarily deployed to Djibouti.

U.S. troops have been in Djibouti for years. Camp Lemonnier is the only permanent U.S. base in Africa, and serves as a key outpost for surveillance and combat operations against al Qaeda and other extremist groups in the region.

The country with the second most U.S. military personnel deployed there is Niger, with roughly 800, according to AFRICOM. Next comes Somalia, Djibouti’s neighbor, with roughly 400 U.S. military personnel. The fourth nation in terms of U.S. military personnel is Cameroon, with more than 100.

Reportedly, the US has one drone base in Niger, and is working on a second one.

It should be noted, though, that exact figures are hard to come by, and Turse points out the many discrepancies in counts that come from different military sources. The question then becomes, “does anyone really know what America’s most elite force are doing in Africa?”

What are we doing?

The Pentagon says that US troops are in Africa “support African partners, alongside allies like France, with the goal of increasing the African nations’ own security capabilities and stabilize the region.”

NPR says,

In almost all of the missions, the Americans are there to advise, assist and train African militaries—and not to take part in combat. The operations tend to be small; they are carried out largely below the radar, and most are focused on a specific aim: rolling back Islamist extremism…Still, those supporting roles can often take US forces into the field with their African partners, as was the case in Niger…It’s hard to say it’s not a combat mission when there’s the potential for conflict and combat as they accompany African troops.

“Africa is an enduring interest for the United States,” said the commander of AFRICOM in a statement.  “Small, but wise investments in the capability, legitimacy, and accountability of African defense institutions offer disproportionate benefits to Africa, our allies, and the United States, and importantly, enable African solutions to African problems.”

It’s hard to decipher what the first part of that crypto-statement actually means–and  the obfuscation is probably intentional. But the part about enabling “African solutions to African problems?” That sounds eerily, worryingly, and dangerously familiar.

The post Where does US have troops in Africa, how many, and why? appeared first on Occasional Planet.

In 2016, the six-nation East African Community—whose members are Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania and South Sudan—agreed to a ban on imported second-hand clothes and shoes. The embargo was set to start in 2019, but it has sparked economic and political controversy that reflects the complicated relationship developing nations have with the United States and other exporters of second-hand clothing. More recently, under fire from both internal and external forces [meaning US second-hand clothing exporters], the EAC modified its proposal, substituting a phaseout for an outright ban.

What’s this all about?

In African nations, imported second-hand clothing is an economic driver and a big business. Today in Uganda, for example, second-hand garments account for over 80% of all clothing purchases. Kenya receives an estimated $4.8 million in import duties annually from second-hand clothing. The huge second-hand clothing market also creates many jobs: clearing agents at ports, truck drivers, cart pullers, loaders, ironing and clothes repair workers, store clerks, and security guards, to name just a few.

East Africa imported $151 million of second-hand clothing last year, most of which was collected by charities and recyclers in the UK, Europe and North America. According to Oxfam, more than 70% of the clothes donated globally end up in Africa. In 2015 Kenya for example imported about 18,000 tonnes of clothing from Britain valued at around $42 million.

These figures explode the widespread assumption in the US that the shoes, outgrown kids’ clothes and no-longer fashionable dresses dropped off at charity shops are donated to needy people in African countries. In fact, according to one recent report, the US generates 1.4 million tons of used clothing annually, of which only 20 percent is sold domestically in thrift stores. As a result, the US exports 800,000 tons of used clothing annually, a significant portion of which is resold in African markets. One of the biggest used-clothing resellers, is Mid-West Textile Company of Texas, which purchases clothes that were donated to non-profit organizations such as Goodwill Industries.

The trouble with Mitumba

While the used-clothing trade creates jobs and government revenue in African countries, it engenders problems, as well.

According to Wikipedia,

 “n Africa, imported second-hand clothing is known as  mitumba. Mitumba is a Swahili term, literally meaning “bundles,” used to refer to plastic-wrapped packages of used clothing donated by people in wealthy countries. The term is also applied to the clothing that arrives in these bundles. One major receiving port for Mitumba is in the Tanzanian city of Dar es Salaam.

Critics of the Mitumba trade note that the influx of cheap clothing is responsible for the decline of local textile industries. Here’s how one website describes the situation:

According to Andrew Brooks (Kings College, London),a debt crisis hit many African economies in the 1980s and 1990s following economic reforms recommended by the World Bank and the IMF. The reforms, amongst other things, opened up local economies to second-hand clothes.

The abbreviated version of the complex story is: declining incomes in subsequent years made locally produced clothes harder to afford. Imported secondhand clothing started flooding into African markets to provide an affordable option that was considered to be at least as good quality as locally produced garments.

Local manufacturing struggled to compete with international competition and factories were forced to close. Prior to this, the East African Community (Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi) boasted a vibrant clothing manufacturing sector which employed hundreds of thousands of people.

In Kenya for example, a garment industry that employed 500,000 people was reduced to only about 20,000 garment workers today. It’s led some academics to argue that old clothing from the U.K. and U.S. was creating a post-colonial economic mess.

Pros and cons of the ban

These issues led the EAC to propose its ban on second-hand clothing imports in 2016. The goal was to revitalize the local clothing manufacturing industry and to create new jobs. One big challenge would be to ensure that the the hundreds of thousands of secondhand clothing workers – like the 65,000 mitumba traders in Kenya – largely in the informal sector, would not be left without work.

The ban idea quickly met some very strong resistance. While protecting local textile manufacturers, it was seen as a threat to a multi-billion-shilling group of importers, and they pushed back.

And, of course, US exporters of mitumba feel threatened, too. Under the African Growth and Opportunites Act [AGOA] enacted in by Congress in 2000 [and recently extended], East African nations get duty-free access to markets in the US if they meet certain conditions, such as improving the rule of law, human rights, and respect for core labor standards. Apparently, influenced by industry lobbyists seeing the import ban as injurious to textile exporters, the US has threatened to end EAC members’ eligibility for duty-free-market access.

Then, in May 2017, internal and external pressures led Kenya to back out of the EAC ban. But Rwanda announced that it would maintain its plan to ban mitumba. Finally, at a summit held in Dar Es Salaam on May 20, 2017, EAC partner states agreed on a compromise proposal, saying:

…for now, the best approach to phaseout second hand clothes is by supporting local industries instead of banning importation of the clothes once and for all.

The phaseout may be helped along by raising import duties on mitumba and by adding taxes on purchases of secondhand clothing, with the effect of making imports more costly in comparison to locally and regionally designed and manufactured clothing. It will be interesting to see howthe EAC nations manage this delicate balancing act.

So, we don’t have to stop donating to our neighborhood thrift shops just yet. But we all need to be aware of what happens to our easily discarded fast-food apparel and the effect that our wardrobe profligacy may be having on people in other parts of the world.

The post Do African countries want your second-hand clothes? Yes and No appeared first on Occasional Planet.

With the rash of unjust police shootings, all eyes are on the home front, so to speak: Americans are talking about racial inequality and other pressing domestic issues.This is to be applauded, as its hard to get folks to focus on tough domestic issues like race and inequality.

Still, my inner International Relations major won’t be satisfied until another pressing story is brought to light from outside the USA. Just such an issue fell into my lap recently, and it is a hell of a story, combining sports, politics, and social justice.

For the past few months I’ve been intern for an organization called EG Justice, a US-based human rights group aimed at bringing democracy and accountability to Equatorial Guinea. Equatorial Guinea is a very small country of 700,000 consisting of a couple islands off the western coast of Africa and a sliver on the African mainland.[Not to be confused with Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Papua New Guinea, or New Guinea.]

President Teodoro Obiang, in power since 1987, is among the worst of the post-colonial African autocrats. For this reason Equatorial Guinea routinely ranks among the least free places in the world. Despite the oil boom of the 1990s, which brought in millions and millions in revenue, the average citizen still lives on about $1 a day.

And yet, Equatorial Guinea will host the African Cup of Nations (AFCON 2015) in January and February, a prestigious soccer tournament followed by millions.

How did this happen? Morocco, the original proposed site, was scrapped over Ebola concerns. With very little time to find a new spot, President Obiang volunteered his country. This produced a glowing response from CAF head Issa Hayatou as a generous and humanitarian gesture, but is problematic for multiple reasons:

Equatorial Guinea’s hosting of AFCON is irresponsible. The government already ignores everyday people, despite the country’s considerable oil wealth. To spend lavishly on a hastily-organized AFCON is a slap in the face to the small African nation’s majority.

AFCON 2015 also serves as a distraction from more pressing problems. Equatorial Guinea is a land of extrajudicial killings, torture, and other forms of political violence. AFCON represents represents an attempt to distract from these urgent issues and for the elite to line their pockets. It is no coincidence that the Deputy Minister of Sports, Ruslan Obiang, or Ms. Francisca Obiang, President of the Office of National Projects, are President Obiang’s children.

In short, we are about to watch the AFCON games play out against the backdrop of oppression and inequality. For those interested in athletics and/or current events, this is one story you won’t want to miss. To find out more and learn how to help, head to http://www.egjustice.org/.

The post AFCON 2015: A thrilling story of sports, corruption, and resistance appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Until about a week ago, I couldn’t find Mali on a map—except that I knew to look in Africa. I knew that it was a poor nation. But I didn’t even know that it was previously known as French West Africa. I should have known more, but I just didn’t. We Americans are not very good at knowing stuff about Africa.  At least this American isn’t. And I’m not proud of that fact.

Now, suddenly, I’m learning that France is using fighter jets against a radical Islamic faction in Mali, and I know nothing about that, either. And as the news trickles out—particularly the news that the U.S. has been helping France with logistics, and that they’re asking for even more help—I’m starting to worry. Isn’t this how things started in Vietnam, when the U.S. got gradually more and more involved after a French military debacle in its former colony? Is there a new “domino theory” at work? Are we—and by “we” I mean U.S. foreign-policy decision-makers—operating on the premise that radical Islam, like communism, will spread from one country to another? [I’m old enough to remember newsreels that showed a scary red communist blob oozing across eastern Europe and Southeast Asia.]  In this view of the world, is Al Qaida the new Viet Cong? And, by the way, were the Cold War theories on which we based our military actions ever borne out in fact?

I listened to President Obama’s second inaugural speech and felt good when I heard him say that America doesn’t need to be in a perpetual state of war.  I hope he can stick to that conviction.

I suspect that I’m at the first stage of this news story—the one where I have very little information on which to form an opinion. I intend to upgrade that status. Right now, though, all I have are questions. But at this stage, questions seem more important than answers—especially at the decision-making level.   I just hope that events don’t overtake the president so quickly that he doesn’t have a chance to ask the questions that seem not to have been asked when the U.S. entangled itself in previous conflicts.

The post Questions about Mali appeared first on Occasional Planet.

The device you are reading this on, whether you are a Mac or PC fan, is very likely helping to fuel the ongoing civil war in the Congo. Most of the electronic devices we take for granted use a substance called Columbite-Tantalite, which is commonly shortened to coltan. The great thing about coltan is that this plain looking metallic powder can hold large capacitive charges when refined. This makes coltan a vital ingredient in everything from cell phones to video games. In fact, coltan is credited as being the key component in the current digital revolution, with even the Department of Defense relying on this mineral for the majority of its smart bombs, jet engines and electronic gear crucial to modern warfare.

The lion’s share of coltan is currently being mined in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DR Congo) which is experiencing what some refer to as “Africa’s First World War”. The current conflict has been going on since the 1990s and is actually a source of profit to a number of multinational  corporations,  which profit from the warfare. Experts estimate that coltan from the DR Congo accounts  for between 64% and 84% of the world supply.  Income from the trade in DR Congo’s precious metals is used to fuel the war, with both sides using the income to buy weapons, employ more soldiers, etc.

There is little desire to end the trade in minerals. Many companies stand to lose a fortune, and the miners are desperate for income, with the average Congolese income currently $750 a year.  Miners work naked in open pits to bring minerals to the surface, where they are panned in much the same manner used by California’s Gold Rush miners. Miners provide their own flashlights with batteries, of questionable worth. working deep in the earth with no protection.  Frequently, they are robbed by local army, rebels and police forces.

The civil war is technically over, with the different parties having agreed to a common government that would take control. Unsurprisingly, there have been problems with the various groups complying. This situation is aggravated by the interference of Rwanda and Uganda, which support various ethnic groups. Crimes committed during the war are truly horrific, with the use of rape as a war tactic and even cannibalism of indigenous Pygmies who are seen as “subhuman” by many. The belief exists among some that eating the flesh of a Pygmy grants magical powers.

The civil war is also severely impacting local populations of mountain gorillas, one of the more endangered mammals on the planet. The gorillas are slaughtered for their meat, which is referred to as “bush meat”.

There have been efforts to curb some of effects of buying coltran, including registering local smelters and “bag and tag” at the mines themselves. The difficulty with these programs is that corruption is rampant among local officials (thus police robbing miners), making it nearly impossible to be whether compliance programs are substantive convenient fictions.

To give a reference to the scale of the problem, when Sony first introduced the Playstation in 2000, the cost of coltan jumped from $49 per pound to $275 per pound, fueling a rush to dig more of the substance out of the ground.

Corporations involved in the electronics business (Microsoft, Dell, Apple, Sony, etc.) complain that it is nearly impossible to figure out which is “blood” coltan and which is not. Activists in Europe did attempt a boycott of cell phones using coltan from the DR Congo. But these efforts so far not caught on or had much impact.

With so many disturbing features to this story, we should also consider that many of the coltan miners are also minors.  The implication is clear: Children of wealthy (by African standards) children receive Xboxes, mp3 players and other electronic gadgets to entertain themselves with, devices that only exist because children in poverty are sent down into hellish mine pits at risk of their lives and health. How many western children would still be asking for the latest ipod, ipad or video game if they knew what torture had been inflicted on children in another part of the world?

The trade in “blood diamonds” has been greatly reduced as a result of a public awareness campaign that educated the general public on how the stones had been obtained. Women (and men) of developed nations began to feel guilty about flaunting their precious stones when they could not be sure how they had been obtained. If a move to boycott coltan derived devices were to mean that laptops doubled in price, would the general public be “up” for that? The other option is to pretend to ourselves that we have never read this (or any other article on the subject) article and clack away happily so we can continue to write articles like this one. The ubiquity of electronic devices means that none of us is superior, none are blameless, and no one gets to preach to those too ill-informed to know better than to support a blood soaked industry. Personally, I wrote this on a laptop, with a cell phone in one pocket and an mp3 player in another, while my flat screen TV was on in the background. So the guilt includes me.

The post Your laptop [and mine] are fueling DR Congo’s civil war appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Door-to-door sales may be a quaint relic of the Norman-Rockwell past in the US, but they could be the next big thing in developing nations. At least they will be if an organization called Living Goods has its way.

Living Goods, founded in 2006, is combining door-to-door marketing—perfected by the Avon cosmetics giant—with the 21^st century notion of micro-financing to help improve health and reduce poverty in Uganda.

Here’s how it works. Instead of mascara and lip gloss, Living Goods offers essential health products, such as condoms, insecticide-treated bed nets, vitamin A, hand soap and toothpaste. Its sales force consists of local residents—mostly rural women—who receive micro-loans [$100 – $250] to get started. The sales force make at modest income by selling these health-promoting products at prices affordable to the poor.  The effect, says Living Goods, is “a sustainable system for improving access to basic health products and defeating the diseases of poverty.” It’s also a vital force of economic development, says the organization, “improving livelihoods by providing rural women a reliable source of income, by keeping wage earners healthy and productive, and by averting costly medical treatments through prevention.”

The “business-in-a-box” that Living Goods’ health promoters buy includes the products, as well as training and coaching. The products focus on: prevention [water treatment, Vitamin A, condoms]; treatment [essential front-line cures for malaria and diarrheal disease, worms, flu and colds]; personal hygiene [feminine hygiene, hand soap, skin lotion and toothpaste]; and household income or savings [solar lanterns, high-efficiency cook stoves, home water filters and reading glasses.]

Most of the health and hygiene items target diseases that are easily preventable and/or treatable with inexpensive drugs, but that account for more than two-thirds of childhood illnesses and death in the developing world. Living Goods focuses on villages with inadequate access to essential medicines, underserved by the existing public and private health infrastructure…

It’s common for rural villagers to spend a full day and up to $2 for transportation to a government dispensary, only to find, after waiting in a long line, that vital medications are unavailable…

In addition, Living Goods agents offer basic family planning services and sell a range of contraceptive products. Health promoters seek out all pregnant women in their service areas and provide them basic pre-natal checkups and health training.

Living Goods chose Uganda as its first target by looking at a list of about 20 countries at the bottom of the World Health Organization’s [WHO] health indicators list. Of the 192 member nations of the United Nations, Uganda had one of the highest mortality rates, with a life expectancy of 48.9 years, an infant-mortality rate of 80.2 per 1,000 live births and and under-5 mortality rate of 137.8 per 1,000 live births. Other health indicators add to a horrifyingly gloomy health picture in Uganda.

A key partner in Living Goods’ effort is BRAC, one of the early pioneers of micro finance. It serves over five million microcredit borrowers and operates its lending profitably, despite charging below market interest rates. BRAC implements its lending through Village Organizations (VOs) composed of 25-30 women. BRAC targets the hard core rural poor who are not served by other lending groups. The average loan is $100-200.

Over the next five years, Living Goods aims to become financially self-sustaining and to replicate its model in other countries. Charles Slaughter, Living Goods’ founder and president, is very open to helping other social enterprises adopt or replicate the model. [Slaughter’s previous claim to fame was as founder of TravelSmith Outfitters, which ranked first in the 1980s as a direct marketer for travel clothing and gear.]

Partnering with the Poverty Action Lab* (PAL), Living Goods is tracking its impact through randomized control studies as it works to lower mortality rates for children under five by 15-30% in its target communities. It’s looking for partners in priority areas including Tanzania, Mozambique, Rwanda, Kenya, Ghana and India.

The post “Better health, better incomes, better lives” appeared first on Occasional Planet.

In the US, living 10 miles from school means riding a school bus or organizing a car pool. In many African countries, it means a very long, daunting walk—which often, in turn, means not going to school at all.  World Bicycle Relief, an American NGO, is trying to change that scenario by distributing 50,000 bicycles to impoverished schoolchildren—mainly girls—in rural Zambia.

The program is called BEEP [Bicycles for Educational Empowerment]. A recent article in Global Post explains the rationale:

In Zambia, as in much of rural Africa, fewer girls attend school mostly because of the long distances involved and the tendency by some parents to use this as an excuse to push them into early marriages. A government of Zambia education survey in 2002 named distance as a major hindrance to rural children attending school; 27 percent of them dropped out because of this challenge, according to the survey.

In addition, the impact of HIV/AIDS, which affects an estimated 16 percent of the population, as well as the growing number of orphans and child-led households, help explain why only 60 percent of primary schoolchildren in Zambia complete their education.

Other organizations have taken notice. According to the World Bank, “There is no investment more effective for achieving development goals than educating girls,” adding that lower pregnancy rates, lower infant child mortality rates and protection against HIV/AIDS infection are among the benefits.

BEEP emphasizes that the bicycles are not intended for recreation, as they are often used in the developed world. A parent of each of the girls who receives a bicycle must  sign a two-year contract that requires the recipient to attend class daily, use her bicycle prudently on transportation and household chores, and never for frivolous activities.

The program is clearly getting good results. Jephias Mutombeni is the Guidance and Counseling teacher at Lwimba Basic School where several students have received BEEP bicycles. He is quoted in Global Post as saying, “Looking at the program of World Bicycle Relief, I can see that there has been tremendous improvement among students in terms of attendance. In the past, we used to experience a lot of absenteeism, but with this, attendance has improved. We hope that even the performance of the students, in the near future, will also improve.”

World Bicycle Relief was founded in 2005 by SRAM Corporation and Trek Bicycle in response to the December 2004 tsunami that swept the Indian Ocean. Its mission statement says:

“Simple, sustainable transportation is an essential element in disaster assistance and poverty relief. Bicycles fulfill basic needs by providing access to healthcare, education and economic development. Bicycles empower individuals, their families, and their communities. Our mission is to provide access to independence and livelihood through The Power of Bicycles.

In partnership with World Vision Sri Lanka, this project provided more than 24,000 locally manufactured bicycles to carefully selected men, women and children in greatest need. The $1.5 million Project Tsunami initiative dramatically accelerated their recovery from this brutal disaster, thanks to funding raised through the bicycle industry, foundations and individual contributors.

As part of its commitment, World Bicycle Relief retained an independent organization to measure the impact of Project Tsunami. Two years after the project was complete, the organization reports these results:

• 88% of recipients depend on bicycles for livelihood activities
• Bicycles can save a household up to 30% of its annual income for transportation costs
• The bicycle program provided critical, appropriate transportation enabling households to resume important livelihood, education and service activities

After the success of Project Tsunami, World Bicycle Relief partnered with a coalition of relief organizations to address the HIV/AIDS crisis in Zambia. Project Zambia will provide 23,000 bicycles to community home-based care volunteers, disease prevention educators and vulnerable households. They also are training and equipping more than 400 bicycle mechanics in the field. This $2.9 million program will reach more than 500,000 adults, orphans and vulnerable children.

In addition to Zambia, the organization also operates in Zimbabwe and Kenya, and it is exploring additional opportunities in Mozambique, Malawi and Uganda.

The post Bicycles help educate girls in Zambia appeared first on Occasional Planet.