> Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2012 09:03:18 +0000
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re; McKinsey and its relationship to deforestation emissions
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> 2nd message, forumers, with apologies that this has taken me a good long
> while to pass on.
> As explanation of the correspondence below, it's between David Ritter from
> Greenpeace and a leading 'genocide' studies colleague of mine, Dirk Moses,
> the passing on the correspondence coming with permission from them both. As
> you'll see however, David is soliciting comment (hence his email included)
> to which I think anybody with expertise is free to reply. More generally, I
> feel it offers insight on the relationship between corporate
> power('knowledge'), the trajectory we as a species are on and who is most
> immediately. likely to get it in the neck as a consequence ..
>
> (still happy new year, even if now with heavy irony)
> mark
>
> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Greetings Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011
> 01:52:30 -0800 From: David Ritter <[log in to unmask]>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> To: Moses,
>
> Dear Dirk
>
> Apologies for the long email out of the blueŠ.but I¹m contacting you because
> of some work I¹ve been involved with at Greenpeace and something that has
> been nagging at the back of my mind in relation to your area of expertise.
>
> Earlier this year we released a report on the global consultancy McKinsey.
> An unusual corporate target for Greenpeace, but we felt that their advice on
> the global scheme to reduce emissions from deforestation was becoming so
> pervasive and influential that they needed challenging. You can read the
> report here
> <http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/media/reports/bad-influence-how-mckinsey-inspi
> red-plans-lead-rainforest-destruction> . Among our findings are that:
>
>
> McKinsey ­ and its cost curve ­ systematically play
>
> down the environmental impact of industrial logging
>
> and deforestation for plantations. At the same time,
>
> it routinely exaggerates the destructive impact of
>
> smallholders and farmers. This leads to plans that advocate
>
> large-scale acquisition of local people¹s lands or settling of
>
> subsistence farmers without sufficient attention to their land
>
> rights, prior informed consent and compensation.
>
>
> Now, for even a hack student of history like me, policy prescriptions that
> lead to the mass removal of peoples¹ from their traditional lands on the
> basis of some abstract rationale has a certain whiff to it ­ particularly
> when one is talking about places like DRC and Indonesia, which have very
> live murderous conflicts. My fairly scathing take on McKinsey in the DRC
> for Global Policy is here
> <http://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/05/05/2011/mckinsey-again-consultan
> ts-and-congo> . It is also important to also see this in the wider context
> of global land-grabbing that is going on (eg see Oxfam¹s recent report here
> <http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/land-and-power-the-growing
> -scandal-surrounding-the-new-wave-of-investments-in-l-142858> ). The scale
> of resource competition as we near Œpeak everything¹ is creating
> unprecedented pressures.
>
> So, if you have even a moment, I¹m wondering what you think about all of
> this? Are you aware of any academics who are looking at what is currently
> going on in a genocide context? Is it something you have looked at or are
> interested in? I¹d be fascinated to hear any thoughts you might have.
>
>
> Bests,
>
> David
>
> David Ritter
>
> Head of Biodiversity
>
> Greenpeace UK