I read a good article in the opinion section of the WSJ a couple days ago about corruption in the World Bank's dealing with Kenya. It's an interesting follow-up to my previous post about profit-motivated capitalism being better than philanthropy. The WSJ article highlights several recent examples of how money was being misused by both Kenyan officials and the World Bank themselves. It was that corruption that prompted Paul Wolfowitz in 2006 to withhold $260 million in lending to Kenya in an attempt to link future lending with guarentees of changes in Kenya. Wolfowitz was forced out and lending increased dramatically as he left. And of course, corruption did not abate in Kenya. The problem with disbursing funds without appropriate guarentees of change or oversight to ensure those changes are carried out is that it feeds a culture of corruption. And, as I've mentioned before, it's that corruption and lack of rule of law that is holding people back from helping themselves.
Read an interesting article a couple weeks back in the WSJ on how biofuels may actually increase carbon emissions in the medium to long-term. Apprently the shifts in land-use necessary to support the production of bio-materials like soybeans, corn, or palm could in fact release more carbon emissions. The time it takes to get carbon-neutral on some of these projects is pretty crazy - 319 years for soybean biodiesel from Brazil (assuming you're clearing rainforest), 93 years for corn ethanol from the U.S. (assuming you're clearing grasslands), 86 years for palm biodiesel from Indonesia (assuming you're clearing rainforest). I suppose biofuels really aren't meant to reduce carbon emissions, but just crazy that they potentially exacerbate the problem so much.
Comments