guyana in 2030 - cobraprojectcobra.org/wp-content/uploads/finalreportfurture...guyana in 2030:...

1 | P a g e

Guyana in 2030

Developing alternative future scenarios through Georgetown stakeholder participation

Dr. Cheddi Jagan Research Centre, Georgetown

8-9th May, 2012

2 | P a g e

Title: Guyana in 2030 Subtitle: Developing Alternative Future Scenarios through Georgetown Stakeholder Participation

Authors: Odacy Davis, Deirdre Jafferally and Isabella Bovolo, Iwokrama International Centre; Jay Mistry, Royal Holloway - University of London; Rob Glastra, IUNC - NL

Cover: Deirdre Jafferally

Design and Report Layout: Odacy Davis & Isabella Bovolo

Cover photo: Demerara Waves News article: “Spring Tide floods a section of East Coast

Highway”- written by Dennis Chabrol, picture taken by Salik Phillips - April 2012.

Name of Publisher: COBRA Project

URL of publisher: www.projectcobra.org

Date: August 2012

Copyright© All rights reserved.

Reproduction and dissemination of material in this publication for educational and other non-commercial purposes are authorised without prior written permission of the copyright holder provided the authors and publisher are fully acknowledge. Reproduction for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the copyright holder.

Recommended citation: O. Davis, I. Bovolo, D. Jafferally, J. Mistry; R. Glastra (2012) Guyana in 2030: Alternative future scenarios through Georgetown Stakeholder Participation COBRA Project, available at www.projectcobra.org

Report published in the context of the COBRA Project (www.projectcobra.org), supported by a

three year grant from the European Commission Seventh Framework Programme.

3 | P a g e

Local Solutions for future challenges: Community Owned Best Practices for Sustainable Resource Adaptive Management in the Guiana Shield (COBRA)

The COBRA Project is funded by: European Commission Seventh Framework Programme

COBRA: The COBRA project aims to investigate how civil society organizations can best work with

indigenous communities in order to respond more effectively to new funding opportunities related

to climate change and payment for ecosystems services and to examine the impacts that these

funding streams and policies have on the communities. Training in video and photographic

techniques also empowers communities to make their own recommendations. COBRA works

primarily with Indigenous Communities in the North Rupununi region of Guyana and in the

Tumucumaque region of Amapa, Brazil, but the lessons learnt from the project will be used to

build capacity in indigenous communities throughout the Guiana Shield and influence how policy is

developed and delivered in this and other parts of the world. The project began in September 2011

and will run for 3 years. The Iwokrama International Centre and the North Rupununi District

Development Board (NRDDB) are one (combined) partner amongst the 8 partners in the project.

Website – www.projectcobra.org

Consortium Partners:

1. Royal Holloway University in UK (Dr. Jay Mistry is leading the consortium) 2. Open University in UK

3. Wildfowl & Wetland Trust in UK

4. Iwokrama International Centre (IIC) & the North Rupununi District Development Board

(NRDDB) in Guyana

5. Institute for Environmental Security (IES) in the Netherlands

6. IUCN, Netherlands Committee in the Netherlands

7. Politecnico di Torino in Italy

8. Equipe de Conservacao de Amazonia (ECA) & APITIKATXI communities in Brazil

Guyana Team

Isabella Bovolo Resident Scientist, IIC

Odacy Davis Project Manager, IIC

Deirdre Jafferally Doctoral Research Associate, IIC

Lakeram Haynes Project Coordinator / Community Researcher, NRDDB

Ryan Benjamin Assistant Project Coordinator / Community Outreach Officer, NRDDB

Bertie Xavier Project Ambassador, NRDDB

Rebecca Xavier Community Research Assistant, NRDDB

Grace Albert Community Research Assistant, NRDDB

http://www.projectcobra.org/

4 | P a g e

Table of Contents ACRONYMS ......................................................................................................................................................... 7

Guyana in 2030: Developing alternative future Scenarios through Georgetown stakeholder participation .... 8

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 8

2. Scenarios ..................................................................................................................................................... 9

2.1 What are scenarios? ................................................................................................................................. 9

2.2 Why use scenarios? ................................................................................................................................ 10

2.3 How are scenarios constructed? ............................................................................................................. 11

2.4 How do scenarios fit into the COBRA project? ........................................................................................ 12

3. Workshop proceedings ............................................................................................................................. 14

3.1 Presentations .......................................................................................................................................... 14

3.1.1 Welcome and opening remarks ...................................................................................................... 14

3.1.2 Special Remarks ............................................................................................................................... 14

3.1.3 Project Information Dissemination ................................................................................................. 15

3.1.4 Key Drivers & Emerging and Trends in Guyana: Strategic and Environmental Perspectives .......... 16

3.2 Group Work ............................................................................................................................................ 17

3.2.1 Setting the scene ............................................................................................................................. 17

3.2.2 Development of group scenarios .................................................................................................... 17

3.2.3 Group 1 scenarios ............................................................................................................................ 18

Group 1 Scenario A – What if good natural-resource management practices dominated and there was a

low dependence on fossil fuels? ............................................................................................................... 21

3.2.4 Group 2 scenarios ............................................................................................................................ 21

Group 2 Scenario A – What if Guyana does not find oil and individualism dominates? .......................... 23

Group 2 Scenario B – What if Guyana does find oil and individualism dominates? ................................ 23

Group 2 Scenario C – What if Guyana does find oil and community spirit dominates? ........................... 24

3.2.5 Group 3 scenarios ............................................................................................................................ 24

Group 3 Scenario A – What if Guyana has transparent governments and continuity in policies? .......... 26

Group 3 Scenario B – What if governments are not transparent and there is no continuity in policies? 26

3.2.6 Group 4 scenarios ............................................................................................................................ 26

Group 4 Scenario A – What if Guyana finds oil? ...................................................................................... 28

Group 4 Scenario B – What if Guyana increases its agricultural diversification? .................................... 29

3.3 Ranking Scenarios ................................................................................................................................... 29

4. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................... 29

5. Next Steps ................................................................................................................................................. 30

5 | P a g e

Annexes ............................................................................................................................................................ 31

Annex 1 – Forum Agenda ............................................................................................................................. 31

Annex 2 – Presentation by Ms. Odacy Davis ................................................................................................ 33

Annex 3 – Presentation by Ms. Deirdre Jafferally ........................................................................................ 36

Annex 4 – Presentation by Mr. Joseph Singh. .............................................................................................. 39

Annex 5 – Presentation by Mr. Rob Glastra. ................................................................................................ 47

Annex 6 – Identification and Ranking of Drivers .......................................................................................... 50

Annex 7 – Future scenarios for Guyana ....................................................................................................... 61

Annex 8 – Ranking of scenarios .................................................................................................................... 67

Annex 9 – List of participants ....................................................................................................................... 68

6 | P a g e

List of Tables

Table 1 – Summary of key characteristics of scenarios .................................................................................... 12

Table 2 – Summary of key high-importance and high-uncertainty drivers used by groups for scenario

development .................................................................................................................................................... 18

Table 3 - Group 1 List of Drivers for Future Scenarios ..................................................................................... 50




Table 7 - Group 1 Scenario Development ........................................................................................................ 61



Table 10 - Group 4 - Scenario Development .................................................................................................... 66

Table 11 - Results of Ranking exercise by Forum Participants ......................................................................... 67

Table 12 - List of Participants ........................................................................................................................... 68

7 | P a g e

ACRONYMS

EU European Union ESS Ecosystem Services IIC Iwokrama International Centre IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature COBRA Community Owned Best Practices for Sustainable Adaptive Resource Management NRDDB North Rupununi District Development Board LCDS Low Carbon Development Strategy EPA Environmental Protection Agency

8 | P a g e

Guyana in 2030: Developing alternative future Scenarios through

Georgetown stakeholder participation

1. Introduction

The COBRA project is made up of a collection of highly specialized research, communication and

management tasks, or Work packages. Work packages 1 and 6 deal with project administration

and dissemination respectively.1

Work package 2 is aimed at developing a shared cross-scalar and interdisciplinary understanding of

the impacts of local, national and international policies at the local community level. A review of

the policies at the various scales will form the background of how far such policies recognize the

realities and concerns of communities at the local scale. This will be accomplished through the

application of systems viability analysis of policies at all scales to determine how effective the

approach is in evaluating the impact of different international and national policies and funding on

local communities.

Once the impact of policies has been analysed, and the application of a systems viability approach

has been assessed, the project will move to a discussion about which alternative futures

(scenarios) are likely that will influence the lives of local communities. Work package 3 deals with

exploring future scenarios affecting social-ecological resilience across local, national and

international scales. This part of the project will involve reviewing and developing future

‘scenarios’ at all three scales and then comparing and contrasting these different level scenarios to

identify cross-scalar synergies, conflicts and worst-case futures. This will lead to the identification

of virtuous and vicious cycles amongst different scales where developments will feedback to make

situations worse, better or counteract change at other levels.

Work package 4 will then identify ideal actions initiated at the community level which will avoid

moving the current situation towards conflicting/worst-case scenarios, but instead maximises the

chances of achieving positive synergistic outcomes. In other words, scenarios pose challenges

(Opportunities/Threats) to local community viability (Strengths/Weaknesses), therefore Work

package 4 identifies (i) community practices that address these challenges and (ii) ways in which

civil society organisations can provide effective support.

These ‘best practices’ will be compiled and documented using a range of visual techniques,

including participatory video and photostories, to provide a comprehensive set of case studies of

1 See ‘COBRA Briefing no 3 – Structure and Activities of the COBRA project: Work packages 1-6’, available from

www.projectcobra.org

http://www.projectcobra.org/

9 | P a g e

current actions/practices which support and enhance civil society organisation and local

community social-ecological viability. Work package 5 will then share the ‘best practices’ with

other communities in the Guiana Shield facing similar challenges to engage wider communities in

capacity building and evaluate the impact of ‘transferability’ of best practices.

This report relates to Work package 3 and details the proceedings and outputs from a workshop

exploring future scenarios affecting social-ecological resilience across the national scales in

Guyana.

The workshop on the development of Future Scenarios for Guyana was held on Tuesday 8th and

Wednesday 9th May, 2012, at the Dr. Cheddi Jagan Research Centre (Red House), High Street,

Kingston Georgetown, Guyana. A range of stakeholders were invited to the workshop to discuss

and develop future scenarios for Guyana. As part of the workshop, we asked;

i. What are the current drivers that stakeholders see as important for the future of Guyana?

ii. What would Guyana look like in the future (next 20 years, 2030)?

Apart from seven COBRA Project Team members, 28 participants attended the two day forum

representing a combination of government agencies, non-governmental organizations, academics

and independent consultants. The opening session of the forum was covered by a National Media

House – News Update Chanel 65.

Mr. Rob Glastra of IUCN Netherlands and Dr. Jay Mistry of Royal Holloway University UK are

responsible for coordinating Work package 3. They have carried out a review of future scenarios at

an international level and will be coordinating the activities at the regional level, focusing on South

America, Brazil and Guyana. During this forum they guided stakeholders in the process of

developing future scenarios for Guyana.

2. Scenarios

2.1 What are scenarios?

Scenarios are stories of what might be. They can help build a shared understanding of potential

futures and allow communities and other stakeholders to engage with how interventions or

activities may impact on people and the environment. In their simplest form, they can be a vision

for the future and then by comparing potential futures to current state of the system, pathways

can be developed to reach optimal outcomes.

Scenarios are generally one of two types:

i. Future developments - a description of a future course of events, sequence of

developments, often highlighting key events, decisions, or turning points (future history);

10 | P a g e

ii. Future states - images of the future emphasising the final state, describing a future set of

circumstances, a portrait of the state of affairs (at a specified date or period).

In addition, scenarios can be either exploratory or normative; that is, they can produce images of

expected futures or desired futures:

i. The explorative (or eventualities) mode of thinking is characterised by an openness to

several possible events and different developments. The strategic purpose is to be better

prepared to handle emerging situations with the idea that it is impossible to predict what

will actually happen. Exploratory scenarios respond to the question: "What do you think

the future might be?"

ii. The normative mode (or visionary) mode of thinking envisages how society or some sector

or activity could be designed in a better way than its present mode of functioning. This

mode of thinking suggests solutions to fundamental societal problems by taking normative

goals into account and exploring the paths leading to these goals. Normative scenarios

respond to the question: "What kind of future would you like to see?"

However, in practice it can be difficult to clearly distinguish between what-if scenarios and

exploratory scenarios, and many actual scenario studies do not belong to just one of the categories

presented above but could be labelled as ‘hybrids’. For example, the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change scenarios are an example of a complex approach covering explorative and

normative elements (as well as predictive forecasting/modelling) and using both quantitative and

qualitative approaches.

2.2 Why use scenarios?

Considering that scenarios explore not only the implications of particular developments but also

paths that might lead us to particular outcomes (desirable or not), they offer us understandings

that are relevant to decisions being made today. Scenarios can inform action and give hope by

providing insights into the scope of the possible.

Ultimately, scenarios can provide better policy or decision support and stimulate engagement in

the process of change. This can come about through scenarios as a vehicle for recognising the

‘weak signals’ of change, preparing for ‘living the future’ in advance, challenging mind-sets, raising

awareness, testing strategies for robustness using ‘what-if’ questions, presenting a common

language and stimulating discussion and creative thinking.

In simple terms, future scenarios are used to explore, create and test desirable range of alternative

future conditions so that long-term policies, strategies and plans across various disciplines can be

generated. They are also used extensively for building climate change models for climate

adaptation and mitigation planning, for long-term land-use and water resources management at

the national and local scales. Future Scenarios support decisions which are more likely to be

11 | P a g e

implemented successfully and fit naturally with human ways of processing and interpreting

complex knowledge.

2.3 How are scenarios constructed?

Scenarios can be created for any geographic or temporal scale, can include both quantitative and

qualitative representations and can be developed in very participatory or more ‘expert-driven’

approaches. Nevertheless, in general there are five basic steps used in most scenario studies:

1. Decision focus: Identify the focal issue or decision: What are the central concerns and key issues

of the users of the scenarios?

2. Key factors: Identify the driving forces that are likely to have the most important influences on

these central concerns of the future. This would involve brainstorming a list of key internal and

external factors and selecting the most critical ones which then form the basis of the scenario

logics. This assessment is based on both the level of impact of the key factors and the uncertainty

regarding their outcome. General categories, such as the STEEPV (social, technological, economic,

environmental, political, values) could be used to help identify possible forces and trends.

3. Pre-determined elements and uncertainties: Which of these driving forces seem pre-determined

and inevitable and which are the factors which seem likely to change the direction of the

scenarios? The predetermined trends are common across all scenarios, but it is the critical

uncertainties which are used to build credible alternative visions of what the future may hold.

Important key factors with a low uncertainty (inevitable or pre-determined factors) should be

reflected, implicitly or explicitly, in each of the scenario logics. For example, any set of scenarios

about global development issues should deal with climate change, although this might assume a

different shape or priority depending on political, regulatory and technological factors. New forces

(value systems, ecological impacts etc.) that are both very important and very uncertain are crucial

for the nature and direction the scenarios take; the most important will form the backbone of the

scenarios.

4. Selecting the scenario logics (or scenario plots): Ranking of the drivers by their importance and

their uncertainty and identifying two or three critical factors of the central themes of the

scenarios. These four scenario logics are then placed in each quadrant of the scenario matrix.

5. Fleshing out: Elaborating the basic scenario logic into full-fledged scenarios. This is often done in

the form of narratives that present a plausible sequence of events. While the two or three most

critical driving forces shape the basic scenario logics, the other significant factors, identified in the

developing phase, can be used to enrich the scenarios. Each of the key factors and trends should

be given some attention in at least one scenario; some, including the inevitable or pre-determined

factors are likely to show up in all the plots. In this way, the complexity that was squeezed out in

whittling an infinite number of possible futures down to just a few basic scenario logics can be

brought back in by posing the question: “What is the value of this factor in each of the four

12 | P a g e

quadrants of the matrix?” Constantly making linkages and interactions between the drivers that

comprise the entirety of the system under study is also important. For example, in the

development of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment scenarios all possible links (direct links,

feedback loops etc.) between direct and indirect drivers, ecosystems and human well-being were

kept in mind (and checked) throughout the scenario development process. This also ensured the

integration of ecological, cultural and other dimensions (demographic, economic, and

technological). Table 1 summarises some of the key characteristics of scenarios.

Table 1 – Summary of key characteristics of scenarios

Scenario characteristics

Scale(s) global, supranational, national, sub-national, regional, local,

vertical integration

Main focus global & integrated, area-based, issue-based, institution-

based, etc.

Time horizon Short (0-5 years), medium (5-20 years), long term (over 20

years)

Temporal nature Snapshot (state), development scenario

Variables Qualitative, quantitative

Dynamics (within one scenario) Trend, shock or wildcard

Level of deviation (between the

scenarios of the exercise)

Alternative (high deviation) or conventional (low deviation)

Diversity of perspectives (in one

scenario)

Yes, no

Inclusion of norms Yes or no, implicit vs. explicit

Level of integration

(interlinkages)

High, low

2.4 How do scenarios fit into the COBRA project?

The overall aim of the COBRA project is to establish how community owned solutions for the

management of natural resources have the potential to act as showcases for the world in

determining the most effective and efficient use of emerging funding streams in order to maximise

social justice and ecological sustainability. In order to do this, it is essential to prepare an

evaluation of community-owned solutions with respect to a range of potential future scenarios.

There are community-owned solutions practised and planned by communities which may only be

viable within specific local, national and international circumstances. Therefore, the aim of using

scenarios is to surface a wide range of international, national and local futures and then compare

their compatibilities with a range of existing and emerging community-owned solutions. For

example, developments at local level, such as abrupt climate change, will have implications for the

evolution of national and international policy, while at the other end of the scale, international

13 | P a g e

policy developments, for example affecting the repartition of natural resources, will have an

impact on local livelihoods.

Figure 1 – Hypothetical future scenarios facing communities within the Guiana Shield

The scenarios described in the Figure 1, for example, present four hypothetical but plausible future

realities that the communities in the Guiana Shield region may face. These scenarios are separated

along two distinct axes. The first describes a continuum between a completely self-sufficient

community which is solely reliant on local natural resources, at one end of the axis, whilst at the

other end is complete dependency for food and income from outside the region. The second axis

describes the situation between no land use change at one end and complete land use change at

the other. Land use change could occur as a result of agricultural or industrial development,

logging, climate change or natural disasters. A typical Traditional Lifestyle scenario is one of a

village community relying on subsistence farming and hunting without contact with external

markets or funding. The Large Scale Tertiary Activities scenario could be one where the entire

community is involved in sustainable eco-tourism using the natural resource base as a visitor

attraction. The community is completely reliant on external trade and does not farm or hunt

resources from their immediate environment. The Large Scale Primary Production Activities

scenario would describe a situation where large scale, commercial agriculture, logging, industry or

mining has transformed the landscape. All members of the community would be employed by

these commercial organisations and therefore would be solely reliant on external trade and

commerce. The Post-environmental and/or Global Economic Crisis Scenario describes a situation

after a major environmental change such as a hurricane or climate change. This would result in a

complete transformation of the traditional resource base but without external support and/or

14 | P a g e

reliance. Alternatively a collapse in the global economy or external trade could also result in this

scenario developing. The above is a simple example of a range of scenarios that could play out in

the Guiana Shield.

3. Workshop proceedings

The following is a synopsis of the Workshop (see Annex 1 for the Forum Agenda). Presentations

are summarized in Section 3.1, whilst group work activities are summarized in the Section 3.2.

3.1 Presentations

3.1.1 Welcome and opening remarks

The workshop was called to order by Dr. Raquel Thomas–Caesar (Director of Resource

Management & Training, IIC) who welcomed all participants, acknowledged invited speakers,

attendees, key stakeholders and the Project Team.

Dr Thomas noted that several projects currently implemented by Iwokrama are being funded by

the European Union (EU): projects focused on natural resource management, culture and local

traditions. She revealed that in excess of sixty community persons have been employed to work on

these projects, of which six persons are working on the COBRA Project. Dr. Thomas also mentioned

that the project involved 8 partners including Royal Holloway University represented by Dr Jay

Mistry and IUCN Netherlands represented by Mr. Rob Glastra.

In closing she highlighted that capacity-building work done by IIC and NRDDB in partnership has

expanded over the years and as a result communities are now in a position to write proposals and

collaborate with partners. Mr. Sydney Allicock (Past Chair of the NRDDB), NRDDB and Bina Hill

Institute were recognized for their work and support over the years.

3.1.2 Special Remarks

Mr. Sydney Allicock (Immediate Past Chairman of NRDDB & Current Member of Parliament)

Mr. Allicock commenced his remarks by saying that “the time has come for indigenous

communities to better understand what the future holds and are doing so through the COBRA

project that is focused on local solutions for future challenges”.

He also noted that there are currently several changes in the weather patterns and that it is

important that the indigenous people are made aware and are properly informed of these

changes. He also stressed the importance of the environment and having communities examine

how funding made available is spent in the long term, realizing maximum benefits.

Mention was made of the methodology used by the project citing that it is interesting and it tells

the story of indigenous people, helping them to understand what is happening on the coast,

regionally and internationally. Mr. Allicock noted that lessons learned in the North Rupununi will

15 | P a g e

be shared with the wider international community. He remarked that the project was on target

and hoped that the partnership of local communities, government, funding agencies, private

sector and individuals would continue as they work towards national development.

In closing he encouraged the young project staff to work hard as we all look forward to a brighter

future.

Mr. Lindsay Jones - Charge´ d´ Affaires - European Union Delegation to Guyana

Mr. Lindsay Jones on behalf of the European Union Delegation to Guyana stated that the EU was

funding 1.9 million Euros towards the COBRA Project with a significant amount going to IIC-NRDDB

for project implementation. He went on to say that the EU is in the process of revising their

business conduct and that starting from next year (2013) they will be reducing the number of

country programmes that are funded, but will instead be focusing on specific interests, and that

one of the strategic themes will be the environment. The EU, he said, will be seeking to determine

what they can do as an organization to support environmental activities that are taking place at

the national level.

Mr. Jones mentioned that the EU participated in the initial discussions on the environment in Rio,

Brazil, 20 years ago and that they will continue to support environmental initiatives in the future.

He also said that several sources of funding from the EU are available to support environmental

issues, however the EU Delegation in Guyana does not have an overview of (i) what is needed in

Guyana and the Guiana Shield, (ii) what is needed by communities that live with the threat of

environmental degradation on a day to day basis, and (iii) the needs of activists who are making

things change through their day to day commitment to the needs of the environment in this part

of the world, and he therefore stressed the importance of his participation at forums of this

nature.

In closing, he indicated that EU is committed to supporting environmental issues through

significant amounts of financing for environmental initiatives such as COBRA which enables the EU

to translate large amounts of money into activities which can benefit the communities, the

environment as a whole and the entire planet. Congratulations were given to the team on their

effort with wishes of continued success with the project.

The opening session concluded with each participant introducing themselves to the forum (see

Annex 9 for a full list of participants).

3.1.3 Project Information Dissemination

Odacy Davis, Project Manager, IIC, presented an overview of the project outlining the vision, aims

and objectives. Project Coordinator Dr. Jay Mistry of Royal Holloway University then explained the

six work packages/thematic areas of the project and how they are expected to be implemented

over the 3-year lifetime of the project. Deirdre Jafferally – Doctoral Research Associate, IIC,

16 | P a g e

presented the research methodologies used by the project, as well as an update on activities

implemented during the period September 2011 – April 2012. (see Annex 2 and 3 for the

presentations made by Ms. Davis and Ms. Jafferally).

3.1.4 Key Drivers & Emerging and Trends in Guyana: Strategic and Environmental

Perspectives

The second day of the forum commenced with two inspiring and motivating presentations from

Major General (Retired) Joseph Singh (also Vice chairman Guyana Protected Areas Board) and Ms.

Vanda Radzik (Social Activist and Independent Consultant) who were asked to give their

perspectives on the key drivers and emerging trends in Guyana from strategic and environmental

and socio-political perspectives respectively.

Mr.Joseph Singh (Major General (Retired) and Vice Chairman Guyana Protected Areas Board)

Mr. Singh stated in his presentation that opportunities for Guyana’s future included Guyana as a

geo-strategic bridge, national development through the Low Carbon Development Strategy2

(LCDS), and economical, mining, petroleum and minerals sector opportunities.

He stated that an opportunity for Guyana as a geo-strategic bridge existed due to its location. He

envisioned Guyana acting as a bridge between the north (Caribbean, North America and Europe)

and the south (Brazil) also facilitated by the fact that Guyana is the only English speaking country in

South America. He spoke of the development of new markets through enhancing Guyana’s

agricultural sector and exporting produce and also in acting as a conduit for transporting produce

from the Amazonas and Roraima regions of Brazil to the Atlantic. New markets could also be

developed for the responsible exploitation of raw materials (such as manganese) and petroleum

products. Other emerging economies included transportation (sea, air and land), construction,

hospitality and telecommunications. He also mentioned that opportunities for Guyana’s

development lay in securing benefits for stewardships of its forest through low carbon

development strategies

In realizing these opportunities he also cited that political and environmental issues as well as

managing expectations of the population are some of the challenges that will have to be faced. In

closing his presentation he used a case study of the Wai Wai people of Guyana to demonstrate the

issues they faced with the past location of their village and how they have adapted and planned

for the future (see Annex 4 for Mr. Singh’s presentation).

Ms. Vanda Radzik (Social Activist and Independent Consultant)

Ms. Vanda Radzik focused primarily on the social and political issues relating to drivers and

emerging trends in Guyana. Areas of interest covered in her presentation included; sustainable

2 http://www.lcds.gov.gy/

http://www.lcds.gov.gy/

17 | P a g e

human development, human rights, value and ethics, the Guyana constitution’s role in protecting

fundamental human rights, Guyana’s future developmental path – LCDS, people and sustainable

development, Rupununi River and Gold Mining and partnerships between indigenous communities

and Civil Society Organizations (CSO).

3.2 Group Work

3.2.1 Setting the scene

As a precursor to developing the group scenarios, Mr. Rob Glastra delivered a presentation on

scenario setting and development (see Annex 5 for Mr. Rob Glastra’s presentation). In his

presentation he outlined the following;

- Alternative futures – national scenarios for people and ecosystems,

- The use of scenarios as a tool to help prepare for the future,

- The definition of scenarios and how to construct them,

- Case study on scenarios at the global, regional and local scales,

- What constitutes a good scenario, and finally,

- COBRA & Scenarios.

3.2.2 Development of group scenarios

Following the presentation, the forum was engaged in small working group sessions. With the

guidance of Dr. Mistry, participants were split into 4 groups – broadly classified as 1)

environmental issues-related people, 2) indigenous groups, 3) government groups and 4)

government ministries. Each group was assigned a COBRA team member. Using the methodology

outlined in Section 2.3 How are scenarios constructed?, groups were asked to discuss key concerns

and issues and to identify the driving forces likely to have the most important influences on these

concerns in the future of Guyana. Possible forces and trends could be identified using the STEEPV

(Society, Technology, Economy, Environment, Politics and Values) framework if participants wished

or groups could use their own methods to identify key drivers. Groups were also asked to say if the

key factors identified would lead to positive or negative developments.

Once drivers had been identified, groups were asked to rank them on two scales: (a) level of

uncertainty and (b) level of importance. Please refer to: Annex 6 – Identification and Ranking of

Drivers for lists of drivers identified by each group.

The groups were then asked to determine two drivers (from within their derived lists) that they

considered to be the most important for the future of Guyana but that also had high uncertainty in

potential futures directions (i.e. the drivers could lead to very different futures depending on

various decisions made). Using these two drivers, four possible scenarios were developed.

However, with limited time to complete this activity, each group described at least one the four

18 | P a g e

scenarios identified. The findings of each group are reflected in Annex 7 – Future scenarios for

Guyana.

Table 2 – Summary of key high-importance and high-uncertainty drivers used by groups for scenario development

Group High Importance & High Uncertainty

Group 1 Renewable Energy development

Man-made disasters

Group 2 Oil located and accessible in large quantities

Community spirit

Group 3 Continuation of policies

Governmental framework

Group 4 Oil production

Agricultural diversification

3.2.3 Group 1 scenarios

Figure 2 – Group 1 Key drivers ranked in order of increasing importance and certainty of occurrence. Drivers chosen for the scenarios were T3 RENEWABLE ENERGY and POOR NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (categorised as E5 Man-made Disasters) having been selected to have most importance but least certainty of occurrence.

Increasing importance

Decreasing importance

Decreasing certainty Increasing certainty

P1 Political

landscape

T4 Research & science

T3 Renewable Energy

T2 Access to

Information

E3 National Debt

S5 Health

EE3 Man-made disasters

T1 Access to tools for

monitoring

EE1 Climate change

E4 Remittance S3 Skills

E1 Business

development E5 Dependency on oil

E2 International Markets

S1 Migration of skills

S2 Crime

S4 Access to Education

EE2 Natural disasters

19 | P a g e

Group 1 ranked their drivers using the STEEP framework (i.e. drivers of Society, Technology,

Environment, Economy, Policy and Values). Many of the key drivers were ranked as being

important and having a high certainty of occurrence (Figure 2).

The group recognized that climate change would have a major effect on the coastal area of Guyana

and that sea level rise for example, is likely to affect Georgetown, the capital of Guyana, by 2031

(see Figure 3). Climate change (an environment driver) was therefore ranked as having highest

importance and the most certainty of occurrence. However, migration of skills (a society driver)

was also ranked as being equally important and having an equal certainty of occurrence. Loss of

skilled workers through emigration was seen to have a negative effect on the availability of human

resources and family structure but was however, linked to remittances (an economic driver) which

would offer relief to some and would form the basis for an informal economy.

Figure 3 – Group 1 diagram showing predicted inundation of the coastland along the Atlantic coastal zone of Guyana due to sea level rise and flooding due to maximum and minimum storm surges in 2031. Taken from the 2

nd National

Report to the UNFCCC.

Access to tools such as remote sensing for environmental monitoring (a technological driver) was

ranked as having high importance. This is because increasingly Guyana is required to monitor its

land-cover (such as proportion of forest coverage, forestry and mining practices, river network and

flood plains, wetlands, agricultural practices) for the purposes of planning, biodiversity monitoring

and payments for ecosystem services. Remote monitoring technologies are particularly

importance as most of Guyana’s interior is inaccessible. Access to monitoring data through fiber-

optics, internet and cell phones was ranked with similar importance, but a much higher certainty

of occurrence as increasingly technological developments are reaching interior locations. Although

equally important, the development of research and science capacity (felt to be closely linked with

access to information and training) was seen to have a lower certainty of occurrence and could

lead to negative impacts through further emigration.

Political drivers were also ranked as being important and although stable and mature governments

were seen to have both negative and positive impacts on society, it was hoped that a system could

20 | P a g e

be developed through independent thought and feedback that would result in positive change for

all people in Guyana. Societal changes, moving towards broader democratic consultation and

involvement in society issues through engaging the population was seen as a desirable and

necessary step.

The decline in the local skill base (a society driver) was ranked fairly high in importance and as

having a fairly high certainty of occurrence. Skills were seen to be driven by an education system

that focuses only on bright children and fostered academic skills over other more practical skills

leading to poor quality workmanship.

Similarly ranked, business development (an economic driver) consisting of mining, timber

harvesting and non-timber forest products, tourism, fisheries and aqua-culture and agriculture,

was seen as generally having a positive influence, but with potential negative impacts to the

environment and / or people. Dependency on oil was seen to have a negative impact. Likewise

national debt was also seen to have a negative impact and was ranked as having relatively low

importance but a high certainty of occurrence. Development of renewable energy technologies

(such as solar power, hydro power etc.) were seen as having less certainty of occurrence.

Renewable energy was seen as a positive development however with potential environmental

impacts due to battery disposal and loss of forest cover. Environmental drivers such as natural and

man-made disasters (including poor natural resource management practices) ranked fairly high in

importance but with a relatively low certainty of occurrence.

Figure 4 – Group 1 scenario. Scenario A - good natural resource management practices with less dependence on fossil fuels.

Finally, health issues (a society driver) such as HIV, malaria and water borne diseases were seen to

have less importance and have less certainty of occurrence due to advances in health care.

Good natural

resource

management

practices

Poor natural

resource

management

Renewable

Energy

Non -

renewable

Energy Scenario

A

21 | P a g e

Values drivers were not ranked for certainty, but are listed here in decreasing order of importance:

decreasing moral values, cultural changes due to demographics (such as immigration), a

decreasing national pride and issues with solid waste management, and decreasing ethnic

tolerance.

Gender equity, governance and indigenous rights were seen as cross cutting themes.

For the purposes of building the scenarios, the drivers of renewable energy and natural resource

management (categorized under man-made disasters) were chosen as scenario logics and were

used as axis points in the development of scenarios (Figure 4). Only one scenario is discussed here,

although Group 1 briefly presented all 4 scenario logics.

Group 1 Scenario A – What if good natural-resource management practices dominated and there was a

low dependence on fossil fuels?

This is the ideal position whereby there would be, by 2030, a commitment to renewable energy

technologies, such as hydro-power, wave energy, geothermal energy and solar power) and their

implementation. Capacity building and training at all levels would occur and there would therefore

be incentives for companies to retain their trained staff. This would lead to less emigration and to

greater in-country benefits. Public campaigns and incentives would increase national awareness so

that energy efficiency would increase at the household and community level. Due to good natural

resource management and effective use of resources, Guyana would be better off financially

leading to better infrastructure development. The government would be accountable for its

actions and would therefore govern wisely. There would be a general uptake of new technologies

and new facilities for waste disposal and recycling. Wise investments would maximize the

sustainability of resources and would foster innovation, therefore research and technological

developments would increase. Unknowns which could alter the applicability of this scenario

include the discovery of oil and gas, high energy tariffs and non-receipt of Low Carbon

Development Strategy payments for ecosystem services.


Group 2 identified many drivers for future change, as shown in Table 4 in Annex 6. Those

categorised as high importance (classed as 1 and 2) are illustrated in Figure 5. Drivers such as

education and health were seen as key for Guyana’s future for all aspects of society and

environmental management. The group identified the continual brain-drain within Guyanese

society and poor healthcare, especially in interior regions, as particularly influential in determining

human capacity. Legislative changes in the form of electoral reforms and revision of the national

constitution were deemed as critical for land tenure and subsequent natural resource

management. The group recognised corruption and fraud as factors controlling many aspects of

Guyana’s society, politics and economy and therefore also ranked this driver as highly important.

This latter driver is linked to mining and timber, where the group saw potential positive economic

22 | P a g e

growth through these extractive activities, but doubts as to the equitability of income and

potential environmental degradation associated with them.

Figure 5 – Group 2 Key drivers ranked in order of increasing importance and certainty of occurrence. Drivers chosen for the scenarios were OIL and COMMUNITY SPIRIT having been selected to have most importance but least certainty of occurrence.

Figure 6 – Group 2 scenarios. Scenario A assumes oil is not discovered and individualism dominates, Scenario B assumes oil is discovered and individualism dominates, whilst Scenario C assumes oil is discovered and Guyana has a community spirit.

As can be seen from Figure 5, most of the drivers ranked of high importance had either high or

medium certainty. The only two that were of high importance but low certainty were oil and

community spirit. In terms of oil, the group felt that although exploratory concessions had already

been given and some drilling activities had taken place, there was still considerable uncertainty

about whether oil in profitable quantities and location was available, and that if oil was found, the

Oil discovered

Oil not discovered

Community spirit Individualism

Scenario

C

Scenario

A

Scenario

B




1 - Education

2 – Health

3 – Legislative changes

5 – Oil

6 – Community

spirit

4 – Transparency

& accountability

9 – Culture

11 – Technology

10– Waste

management

12 – Natural sea defense

7 – Mining

8 – Timber

23 | P a g e

potentially profound changes in Guyanese society and environment. The group also strongly

articulated the individual versus community nature of Guyanese culture. They felt that in the past,

people were much more community spirited and worked collectively to achieve their goals. They

spoke about changes to society where people were becoming selfish and reluctant to help others

around them. As a group, they saw a great deal of uncertainty in whether a future Guyana would

be based on individual or community values.

Therefore Oil production and Community spirit were selected as scenario logics and were used as

axis points in the development of scenarios (Figure 6).

Group 2 Scenario A – What if Guyana does not find oil and individualism dominates?

By 2030 in this scenario, Guyana would be completely dependent on oil imports. The high price of

oil has led to key sectors, such as the private sector, individual business and foreign investors,

dominating the soil import market, especially those living close to national border areas. In these

same areas, illegal fuel smuggling by criminal gangs prevails. With the increased the cost of living,

the government is forced to give ease of accessibility through subsidies, but favours those

politically aligned with them. This allows political and ethnic divisions to become entrenched in

society, leading to civil unrest and local interior communities aligning themselves with bordering

nations/communities (Brazil, Suriname, Venezuela). Loss of human capacity and skilled workers to

other countries continues, leaving those behind to accept inadequate low paying jobs. Inadequate

investment in education and healthcare means there are more school dropouts, the University of

Guyana has closed, there are no staff to run major hospitals and there is an increasing ageing and

morbid population. The government has increased production and export of minerals and timber

to generate revenue and many communities in the interior are overrun by illegal miners and

loggers, as well as irreversible environmental degradation. In some areas, there are hydro, bio-fuel

and renewable energy projects, but these are generally dominated by private business.

Group 2 Scenario B – What if Guyana does find oil and individualism dominates?

By 2030 in this scenario, Guyana is a divided country of the rich and poor. The discovery of oil and

its associated income has led to large financial benefits for the elite and those politically aligned

with the government. There is little transparency and accountability of the oil income, while at the

same time, investment in sectors such as education, technology, tourism, infrastructure, transport,

agriculture and policy reform are neglected. People lack motivation to work and a vibrant black

market in goods has emerged. There have been drastic changes in cultural life where prostitution,

crime, drugs and human trafficking are norms and people live in ghetto-like districts or in fenced

communities. Communities living in close proximity to oil industries, wells or worksites depend

entirely on those activities for their livelihoods, and abandonment of traditional lifestyles has

increased health problems and cultural loss. In other areas, illegal mining and logging continue and

here there is little law enforcement or government intervention, leading to slum communities.

Waste disposal issues and oil spills are regularly in the news, but although irreversible ecosystem

24 | P a g e

change is occurring and the international community raises its concerns, the government is self-

centred, and has poor relations with its neighbours and Caribbean Community countries. There are

small protest movements, but mainly underground and through the Internet, as any protest

gatherings are quickly stamped out through police force.

Group 2 Scenario C – What if Guyana does find oil and community spirit dominates?

By 2030 in this scenario, Guyana has realized its motto of ‘one people, one nation, one destiny’.

The income from oil exports means there is more money to invest in key sectors such as

education, infrastructure and healthcare. The University of Guyana is now the Caribbean hub for

research and development activities and boasts world-class educational and research facilities.

Communities in the interior regions have greater access to vital services and markets. The

economy is able to diversify, and technology plays an increasingly important role as a service

industry. Advocacy and organised pressure groups demand accountability and stewardship of oil

income, and civil society organizations sit on all levels of government hierarchy and decision-

making. Specialist groups with representation from all sectors of society have been established to

effectively manage and monitor oil extraction activities and the companies responsible. This

ensures that environmental issues are at the forefront of government policy and that any waste

and spill problems are dealt with quickly and effectively. In addition, while mining and logging

activities continue, they are also closely monitored. This all attracts tourists to the country and

there is an increasing influx of skilled Guyanese migrants back to their homeland.


Interestingly, the two drivers of change that were considered by Group 3 as the most important

ones for Guyana’s future were both governance-related. They were also ranked as the most

uncertain ones and this underlines how much Group 3 felt that the country’s future depends on

the continuity and effective enforcement of policies, and on transparent and accountable

government institutions. These two governance drivers were taken as the axes for the

development of alternative scenarios.

The three drivers that are next in importance (Figure 7) were all considered by this group as highly

certain: climate change and two economic sectors, i.e. the extraction of minerals and fossil fuels,

and agricultural development, including biofuels. Climate change was seen as a threat to forests

and biodiversity and to food production. A positive response to the second threat could be a

change to other crops that were better adapted to flooding and to inland production areas. The

two economic drivers and Guyana’s less certain future in energy generation are expected to lead

to significant changes in land use and forest cover and to affect ecosystem services, especially

from fresh water resources. On the positive side, group 3 expects these drivers to lead to an

increase in revenues and a reduced dependence on fossil fuels, and increases in employment and

in food security. The quality of education was identified as a driver of change as well, considering

25 | P a g e

its importance for political awareness and for the nation to be prepared for upcoming

development challenges.

Figure 7 – Group 3 Key drivers ranked in order of increasing importance and certainty of occurrence. Drivers chosen for the scenarios were POLICY EFFECTIVENESS and GOVERNMENTAL FRAMEWORK, as having highest importance but least certainty of occurrence.

Figure 8 – Group 3 scenarios. Scenario A assumes continuity and transparency in government policies, whilst scenario B assumes the opposite.

Ineffective, non-transparent

government bodies

Continuity in

government

policies

Discontinuous

government

policies

Scenario

A

Scenario

B

Effective, transparent

government bodies




3 – Climate change

1 - Policy effectiveness

2 – Governmental framework

7 – Education

8 – ICT access

4 – Mining and oil extraction

5 – Agricultural development 6 – Energy generation

9 – Global awareness

10 – Population dynamics

26 | P a g e

Group 3 Scenario A – What if Guyana has transparent governments and continuity in policies?

The stable governance context allows for the development of PES schemes (Payments for

Ecosystem Services), with considerable payments in the coming decades by countries that want to

compensate their high carbon emissions. Sustainable forest management becomes the rule in

Guyana and deforestation, land degradation and biodiversity loss remain very low. There is

consistence in Guyana’s energy policy that moves away from fossil fuels towards renewable and

greener sources. Mining continues, but under reduced-impact conditions and with environmental

and social safeguards in place. Increased government investment in education leads to stronger

institutions and higher education levels, and to a reduction in the brain drain. Government

investment in infrastructure also increases, but based on sound land use planning. This improved

infrastructure does make the country more attractive to powerful foreign investors in search of

land and natural resources.

Group 3 Scenario B – What if governments are not transparent and there is no continuity in policies?

The lack of continuity and transparency in government policies leads to growing exploitation of

natural resources (timber, agriculture, mineral resources) by foreign companies, with little control

by government agencies. As a result, land use changes rapidly in some regions, and the rates of

deforestation and land degradation increase. These foreign companies do create employment

opportunities, but foreign workers compete with Guyanese. With government conditions not

favouring innovation and a long-term vision, the country remains dependent on fossil fuels and the

implementation of environmental policies is poor. The potential to benefit economically from

ecosystem services is hardly utilized and Guyana loses its pioneer position. The lack of innovation

leads to a decreased awareness of best practice techniques in resource exploitation and to the use

of outdated technologies that affect Guyana’s competitive power on the regional and global

markets. Since investment in sound land use planning is low, infrastructure development does not

consider the need and opportunities to adapt to climate change. The consequences are a loss of

agricultural potential, loss of biodiversity and unstable food security. Government policies do little

to address the inequitable distribution of resources and wealth, which leads to increased poverty.


Group 4 thought that mining was the most important key driver for Guyana, and that it was

positive for economic growth because it allowed the country’s GDP to grow. It also fostered more

business generation and increased employment opportunities. However, it was thought to have a

negative impact on the environment due to the necessary effects of deforestation and the

consequential environmental degradation. Guyana’s development strategy was also ranked as

important; it was felt that long-term strategic plans at the government level were necessary to

ensure adequate infrastructure and policies were put into practice, however changes in

government were seen as disruptive as policies that were in place could too easily be overturned.

The third top-ranking key driver was climate change. It was felt that increases in extreme climatic

27 | P a g e

events such as floods and droughts had a negative impact on society and the economy due to the

losses of crops, infrastructure and livelihoods, however if adaptation and mitigation policies were

put in place, positive outcomes of climate change could be the development of new communities

in areas less susceptible to drought or floods. All three drivers were classed as having a high

certainty of occurrence (see Figure 9).

Figure 9 – Group 4 Key drivers ranked in order of increasing importance and certainty of occurrence. Drivers chosen for the scenarios were OIL and AGRICULTURAL DIVERSIFICATION having been selected to have most importance but least certainty of occurrence.

Figure 10 – Group 4 scenarios. Scenario A assumes oil is discovered, whilst scenario B assumes agricultural diversification happens.

Drivers which were classed as having a low certainty of occurrence included Oil Production. This

ranked fourth in terms of importance. It was felt that if oil was found in Guyana, this could bring

Oil discovered

Oil not discovered

Agricultural

diversification

does not happen

Agricultural

diversification

happens!

Scenario

A

Scenario

B




1 - Mining

2 – Development strategies

3 – Climate change

4 – Oil

5 – Agricultural

diversification

9 – Logging

10 – Bio fuel

6 – Land tenure 7 – Migration

8 – New technology

28 | P a g e

substantial economic benefits and reduce Guyana’s reliance on foreign imports; however,

although neighbouring countries to Guyana are oil producers, it is at this moment highly uncertain

if petroleum resources will be found in Guyana and to what level. Although the exploratory wells

are currently being drilled, no reserves have been found to date.

Agricultural diversification would be beneficial for Guyana as it would reduce Guyana’s

dependence on importing food supplies and would increase export markets. Diversification here is

not intended to suggest an expansion of Guyana’s agricultural lands but rather increase levels of

diversification in already existing agricultural lands such as sugar fields, where the markets have

been decreasing. This was ranked fifth in terms of importance and medium in terms of certainty of

occurrence for the future.

Both Oil production and Agricultural Diversification were selected as scenario logics and were used

as axis points in the development of scenarios (Figure 10).

Group 4 Scenario A – What if Guyana finds oil?

The prospect of finding oil in Guyana is highly uncertain but if it is found it would have a huge

impact in Guyana. There are currently oil companies digging exploratory wells offshore however

deposits of oil have not yet been found. Assuming oil was found tomorrow, by 2030 positive

impacts would include the creation of new training and job opportunities and emerging industries.

There would be an influx of foreign exchange following foreign investments and a rapid increase in

disposable income. Investment by the oil companies and other associated industries would lead to

improved transport and communication infrastructure. Additionally, as oil companies usually bring

benefits to the local area when they are established in a country, there may be improvements and

expansion of education facilities and improvements in availabilities of green technologies.

Generally, there would be an improved standard of living leading to less emigration, and a

potential re-introduction of Guyana’s diaspora.

Negative impacts may occur however, through environmental disasters such as oil spills, and there

would be general increases in pollution levels. Guyana’s ‘green’ status may also be negatively

affected due to the rapid, high release of carbon from the burning of the fossil fuels, leading to a

‘carbon-spike’ in Guyana’s carbon quota. This may negatively impact Guyana’s Low Carbon

Development Strategy and affect potential Payment for Ecosystem Services mechanisms and

carbon trading budgets. Social values would be negatively impacted due to the rapid increase in

disposable income leading to ‘social ills’ such as prostitution, gambling and alcoholism. Family

units would also be disrupted as (traditionally) males would be working away from the family for

large amounts of time on oil rigs. Although the oil industry would introduce new skills to Guyana’s

workforce, other industries, such as mining or agriculture, may find that there are insufficient

workers for their needs.

29 | P a g e

Group 4 Scenario B – What if Guyana increases its agricultural diversification?

Currently, large sections of agricultural land on the coast are used for sugar and rice production,

however the sugar industry is no longer profitable and agricultural land is either going fallow or

handed over to new housing schemes. Aiming for agricultural diversification rather than mono-

culture, would enable Guyana to produce its own food and lower its reliance on food imports

giving it food security. It may also be able to export various food items to the rest of the Caribbean

and the world leading to increases in GDP. The introduction of new technologies could increase

production levels and establish a new knowledge base. Agroforestry would also be established and

cleared lands would be rehabilitated or re-vegetated thereby establishing a more productive land

use. Agricultural diversification would lead to a rebirth of a cooperative spirit amongst the

population and improvements in transportation networks. Negative impacts would be relatively

low as most of the land would already have been used for agricultural purposes, however some

deforestation or degradation of forested land may occur with associated disruptions of ecosystems

if agricultural expansion were to happen.

3.3 Ranking Scenarios

A “market place’ exercise was carried out where each individual was given a scoring sheet to rank

the scenarios that were developed. Each participant was required to identify;

- The most relevant group of scenarios

- The most likely individual scenario

- The most desirable individual scenario.

The results of this exercise are summarized in Annex 8 – Ranking of scenarios. Participants ranked

Group 1’s drivers (Natural Resource Management and Dependency on Fossil Fuels) as being most

relevant scenarios logics. The individual scenario that participants felt was most likely to occur in

the future was good natural resource management and a heavy dependency on non-renewable

energies (also Group 1). The most desirable scenario outcome however, was the continuity of local

and regional effective policies and an effective and transparent government (Group 3).

Unfortunately, this scenario was not deemed as likely to occur.

4. Conclusions

The two day forum on developing scenarios of Guyana’s future has initiated the process for COBRA

work package 3 implementation in Guyana. Participants were encouraged to use the same process

of identifying drivers and developing scenarios to advance long term strategies for development of

the organization, community, country or area of work they represented.

30 | P a g e

5. Next Steps

The Project Team agreed to do the following;

- Distribute the Report to all participants

- Request individual permission/consent from each participant for use of pictures and videos

taken at forum.

- Send project newsletter to those who requested it

- Make video of key presentations available to NRDDB and others

- Send final COBRA Project Scenario Development report in a year’s time to all participants.

31 | P a g e

Annexes

Annex 1 – Forum Agenda

COBRA STAKEHOLDERS FORUM SCENARIOS FOR GUYANA'S FUTURE CHEDDI JAGAN RESEARCH CENTRE

8th and 9th MAY, 2012

Workshop Schedule

Day 1

Time Activities Session Host Organisation

08:30 – 09:00 Registration

09:00 - 09:15 Opening Remarks Iwokrama North Rupununi EU Delegation to Guyana

Dr. Raquel Thomas-Caesar Mr. Sydney Allicock Mr. Lindsay Jones

Plenary

09:15 - 09:30 09:30 - 09:45 09:45 - 10:05 10:05 - 10:15 10:15 - 10:35

What is COBRA? (5 minute video) Putting COBRA into Context Project Research Methods Project Update - Guyana Video on Rupertee (20 mins)

Ms. Odacy Davis Dr. Jay Mistry Ms. Deirdre Jafferally Ms. Deirdre Jafferally Ms. Deirdre Jafferally

Plenary

10:35 - 10:45 BREAK

10:45 - 11:05 11:05 - 11:15 11:15 - 11:45 11:45-12:15

Scenario development: Why? Introduction to the small group sessions Identifying drivers –Using the STEEPV (Society, Technology, Economy, Environment, Politics and Values) framework for helping participants to identify the key trends and dynamics that determine Guyana future Small group report back

Mr. Rob Glastra Dr. Jay Mistry

Small groups

12:15-13:15 LUNCH

32 | P a g e

13:15-14:00 14:00 - 14:45

Selecting critical uncertainties – to identify drivers that are important in determining how the future evolves, but whose future development is highly unpredictable. Report back

Dr. Jay Mistry Small groups

14:45 - 14:55 BREAK

14:55 - 15:15 Wrap up of the day's sessions Dr. Isabella Bovolo Plenary

Day 2

Time Activities Facilitator Organisation 09:00 - 09:10 Recap of previous day's work Dr. Isabella Bovolo 09:10 - 09:35 09:35 - 10:00

Key drivers and emerging trends in Guyana Environmental & Political Perspectives Socio-economic Perspective

Mr. Joe Singh Ms. Vanda Radzik

Plenary

10:00 - 10:10 Putting the presentations in context with the activities

Dr. Jay Mistry and Mr. Rob Glastra

Plenary

10:10 - 10:30 Introduction – establish the scenario framework using the critical uncertainties from first day

Dr. Jay Mistry Small groups

10:30-10:40 BREAK 10:40 - 12:35 Creating the scenarios – begin

developing the scenario narratives Dr. Jay Mistry Small groups

12:35 - 13:15 LUNCH 13:15 - 14:45 “Market Place” presentations by

each group of scenarios Mr. Rob Glastra Small groups

14:45 - 14:55 BREAK 14:55 - 15:15 Applying future scenarios in your

organisation Dr. Jay Mistry Small groups

15:15 - 15:30 Wrap-up & Conclusion Ms. Odacy Davis Plenary

33 | P a g e

Annex 2 – Presentation by Ms. Odacy Davis

34 | P a g e

35 | P a g e

36 | P a g e

Annex 3 – Presentation by Ms. Deirdre Jafferally

37 | P a g e

38 | P a g e

39 | P a g e

Annex 4 – Presentation by Mr. Joseph Singh.

40 | P a g e

41 | P a g e

42 | P a g e

43 | P a g e

44 | P a g e

45 | P a g e

46 | P a g e

47 | P a g e

Annex 5 – Presentation by Mr. Rob Glastra.

48 | P a g e

49 | P a g e

Annex 6 – Identification and Ranking of Drivers

Table 3 - Group 1 List of Drivers for Future Scenarios

Group 1 - Selection and Ranking Drivers Categories Drivers Positive Negative Importance

1= Highest 10= Lowest

Certainty 1=Highest 10=Lowest

High Importance, Low certainty

Society Where we would like to go? Move towards broader democratic consultation and involvement in society issues (engaging the population)

S1.Migration of skills

affecting human resource availability also family structure, remittance effect

1 1

S2.Crime 5 4

S3.Skills

Use of skills an education system that focuses on bright children and focuses on academic rather than non-technical

2 3

S4.Access to Education

(+ and -): hinterland communities

6 4

S5.Health

e.g. HIV, Malaria,

Water borne disease

7 7

Technology T1: Access to tools for monitoring

e.g. Remote

Sensing

(Monitoring)

1 3

T2:Access to information e.g. fibre optics, internet, cell phones

2 1

51 | P a g e

Group 1 - Selection and Ranking Drivers

Categories Drivers Positive Negative Importance 1= Highest 10= Lowest



T3:Renewable energy development (Solar, Hydro etc.)

what we doing with the solar batteries

loss of forest cover 2 6 *****

T4:Research and Science Development (UG, GSA, NARI, IAST etc.)

linked to access to info and training,

could lead to further migration , political will

1 7

Environment EE1:Climate Change, El Nino, La Nina (-)

Results in Flooding, droughts, fire etc.)

1 2

EE2:Natural Disasters/ Phenomena (-)

Negative impact 5 6

EE3:Man-made disasters poor natural resource

management

practices, are we

planning our housing,

roads, drainage , sea

defence etc.

3 8 *****

Economics E1:Business Development (+ but could be linked to the environment/people) E1.1 Mining E1.2 Timber/NTFPs Harvesting E1.3 Tourism E1.4 Fisheries/Aqua Culture E1.5 Agriculture

3 3

E2:International Markets (+ and -) 4 3

E3:National debt negative 9 3

52 | P a g e





E4:Remittance local and international (informal economy)

reliance of some 2 1

E5:Dependency on oil negative 3 2

Politics P1:Political landscape (stable government, maturity)

A hope for the future: A system that encourages independent thought, feedback that can result in positive change for all Guyana

- and + 2 4

Values V1:Moral compass negative

V2:Cultural change due to demographics (e.g. immigration)

- and +

V3:National pride negative (e.g. solid

waste management)

V4: Ethnic tolerance negative

Cross Cutting Issues

Gender equity Governance Indigenous Rights

53 | P a g e




Certainty


Society Education -Secondary education for all -More completing University -More trained teachers

Would stay the same 1 High

Health -More doctors, RAM (Remote Area Medical) expanding services and scope, more accessibility to health care

Fear of losing human resources – sustainable brain drain

1 High

National Security

We have quality security that is recognized by other countries See strengthened security for the future

Threats of invasion to Essequibo, weak leadership and poor integrity in the security forces

3 Medium

Culture All ethnic groups have their festivals/celebrations recognized More integration in Guyana Shield

Situation is the same 2 Medium

Technology Technology 75% of Guyana’s population is computer literate Easy access to internet for all

Unemployment because of technology replacing jobs. No recycling for outdated technology / equipment

2 High

54 | P a g e



Certainty


Environment ESS

Payment for ecosystem services, increase in ownership by people

Tourism

Tourism increases in income for Guyana. Alternative livelihood development

3 High

Waste Management

Cleaner and healthier Guyana Ineffective waste management plan being implemented

2 Medium

Natural Sea-defence

Mangrove sea defences 2 High

Economics Tourism -More organized tourism destinations -Instituted Ministry of Tourism -Increase in income for country

-Damage to environment due to excessive tourism

3 High

Oil -Oil located and accessible in large quantities

-Damage to ecosystems -Change in cultural way of life -Lack of financial accountability

2 Low *****

55 | P a g e



Certainty


Timber Increase in timber concessions that are adhering to the GFC guidelines for harvesting -Increase in rangers and checks points -Increased training and appropriate equipment for monitoring officers

Stay the same 2 High

Mining Increased income for country from increased mining and gold prices

-Forest degradation, pollution, prostitution, Trafficking in persons, loss of ecosystem.

2 High

Taxes Decrease in taxes Increase in taxes 4 Low

Politics Democracy Inclusive governance 3 Medium

Legislative Changes

-Electoral reform -Revision of national constitution

1 High

Decentralization of Governance

Decentralization of governance, more power to local authorities

4 Medium

Transparency& Accountability

1 Medium

Values Community Spirit

2 Low *****

Respect (Env vs. Money)

3 Medium

56 | P a g e


Group 3 – Selection and Ranking of Drivers

Categories

Drivers Positive Negative Importance (1=highest importance)

Certainty


Politics Policies Continuity of policies Lack of enforcement and implementation,

1 Low *****

Governmental Framework

Policies overlapping with each change in Government

2 Low *****

Economic Energy Generation ( hydro power, biofuel, solar)

-Income generation and foreign exchange -Reduction in dependence on fossil fuels, decrease energy cost. -Increased employment and investment opportunities -Increased food security

Changes in land use, increased deforestation/ land clearance for agriculture, land degradation/pollution, loss of ecosystem services and fresh water resources, loss of biodiversity

6 Medium

Mining/Drilling exploration

4 High

Agricultural Development

5 High

Society /Cultural Development

Education Increased awareness of issues, increased policy awareness – increased human resources

Unprepared for development

7 Medium

57 | P a g e


Categories


Certainty


Population dynamics

Drain on natural resources Influx of skills resources

10 Low

Technology ICT Increased reliable access to information locally/regionally/globally Increased networks of communication locally ( communities)

8 Medium

GIS

Values Global Awareness -Increased awareness of global issues – regional- local issues -Increased ability to generate solutions

9 Low

Environment

Climate Change - Food

security

Movement from existing crops to those adapted to flooding patterns and movement of agricultural lands inland (away from coast)

-Loss of biodiversity and loss of forested areas -Decreased food production

3 High

58 | P a g e


Categories


Certainty


- Flooding -Loss of agricultural resources -Shift of human resources -Decrease water quality and access Increase disease and coastal degradation and health services industry

- PES -Increased income generation from increased emitting countries -Increased leader in decreased carbon initiatives

Loss of biodiversity Decreased natural resources

59 | P a g e



Categories Drivers Positive Impacts Negative Impacts Importance (1 highest)

Certainty of occurrence


Mining +ve for economic growth by increasing GDP, employment, incoming foreign currency

-ve for environment impact due to deforestation and degradation

1 High

Development strategy

+ve for governance due to long term strategic plans

-ve for governance due to potential changes in government

2 High

Climate Change

+ve for socio-political growth agenda due to potential development of new communities

-ve for environment & economics due to the increased potential for flooding, droughts, loss of crops, loss of infrastructure, lives and livelihoods

3 High

Oil Production

+ve for economic growth by increasing GDP, employment, incoming foreign currency

4 Low *****

Agricultural Diversification

+ve for Emerging markets due to imports substitution & different crop production. In the savannahs it will help combat environmental degradation

5 Medium *****

Land Tenure +ve for financial security and ownership (secure investment) +ve for environment possibly

-ve for environment due to Deforestation and degradation

6 High

60 | P a g e


Categories Drivers Positive Impacts Negative Impacts Importance (1 highest)

Certainty of occurrence


Migration +ve for socio-economic growth due to increased remittances

-ve for society due to brain drain effect

7 Medium

Adoption of new technology for mining and logging

+ve for technological growth by increasing efficiency, capacity and green technology

8 High

Logging +ve for economic growth by increasing GDP, employment, incoming foreign currency

-ve for environment impact due to deforestation and degradation

9 Low

Ecotourism +ve for economy due to increased foreign exchange, conservation of cultures and biodiversity

10 High

Bio Fuel +ve for economic growth by increasing GDP, employment, incoming foreign currency, lowering fuel import bill

11 Low

61 | P a g e

Annex 7 – Future scenarios for Guyana

Table 7 - Group 1 Scenario Development

Group 1 – Scenario Development

Scenario A

Effective natural resource management practices in an renewable energy environment (green energy)

Surprises

- Commitment to implementation of renewable energy and capacity building at all levels

- Improved training, institutional capacity, enforcement and monitoring. - Incentives for human resources retention - Community and household (local) and national awareness and buying –in - Availability (timeless, quantum, effectiveness) of financial resources - Good governance and accountability (users and implementers) - Appropriateness of technology (consider use and disposal) all

variables/aspects - Wise investments to maximize sustainability, innovation and research, and

development options - Run of river hydro, wind, tidal wave, geothermal - Abandonment of green energy pathway if oil is found

- High energy tariff - Non-receipt of LCDS funds - Discovery of oil and gas.

62 | P a g e



Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C

More dependent on petrol import and having individualism

Oil/Petrol becomes main source of income for Guyana while having individualism

Oil/Petrol becomes main source of income for Guyana while having community spirit

- Increased cost of living, transportation, taxation

- Loss of human resources and skilled labour force

- Increase child labour, human resources forced to go in the direction of seeking and accepting inadequate, low paying jobs.

- Education affected, more school drop outs

- Criminal activities – illegal fuel smuggling

- Domination of oil import market by private sector, individual business and foreign investors, particularly those close to the borders

- Increased production and export cost of mined products, timber

- Forced government subsidies – possibility of ease of accessibility of oil by constituencies that are pro government.

- Increase in hydro, bio-fuel, renewable energy projects – but dominated by private business with government

- Ecosystem affected, waste disposal and oil spill issues

- Change in cultural way of life, lack of zeal to work

- Great divide between rich and poor, less middle class

- Little and poor investments in sectors such as education, technology, tourism, infrastructure, transport, agriculture, policy reform

- Greater impacts on communities/village, groups in close proximity to oil industries, wells, worksites

- Increase in prostitution, crime, drugs, human trafficking

- Poor investments with oil income both at the national and international level

- Lack of transparency and accountability - Dictatorship rules, poor international

relations, self-centred government, no sense of integration with CariCom ( South America)

- Increase in employment, wages - Better access to higher

education (secondary, UG) - Higher standard of living for

everybody - Trained persons staying in

country - The realization of our motto,

one people, one nation, one destiny.

- More investment in technology in order to offer diverse services

- All citizens can afford to purchase their own laptops

- Oil spills and waste management issues - but effectively handled by government.

- More advocacy for effective management and monitoring of oil company

- Increase in mining, increased gold price

- More advocacy and organized pressure groups demand

63 | P a g e

support - Force new technological innovations - Less investments in communication - Political and ethnic divisions related

to access, cost, use and decisions of petrol(oil)

- Local communities aligning themselves with bordering nations/communities (Brazil, Suriname, Venezuela)

accountability and stewardship - More affordable cost for

tourist/visitors to currently remote tourism sites and attractions.

- Repatriation of skilled workers to homeland (Guyana)

- Less tax - More money to invest in

research and research institutions – education, infrastructure, social development, technology

- Better international relations – responding to call for help from other nations

64 | P a g e



Scenario A Scenario B

Continuity of ( Local and regional) effective policies and effective, transparent governmental body

Discontinuity of policies, no effective, transparent governmental body

1.Climate Change a. Adaptive initiatives

- New infrastructure for inland development and NDIA and sea defence

- New agricultural initiatives for food security b. Payment for ecosystem services (PES)

- Increased income from high emitting countries - Sustainable forest management - Minimal loss of biodiversity

2.Growth/Development Economic a. energy generation

- Moving towards greener energy – solar, wind, biofuel - Less dependence on fossil fuel

b. Mineral exploration

- Less income generated from mining - Less loss of biodiversity - Reduction in land degradation

3.Social Development a. Education

- Stronger, more effective regional, local research institutions

- Greater continuity of education ( less brain drain in society)

1.Economic Growth

- Increased dependence on fossil fuel - No continuity of effective policies (environmental) - Land use change - Increased generation of income from timber, agriculture,

mineral exploration - Increased exploitation of natural resources/mineral by

foreign bodies - No monitoring and evaluation of policies and practices –

no records of lessons learned - Higher rates of deforestation and land degradation - Decreased awareness of best practice techniques - Deceased employment for Guyanese workers( competing

with foreign workers brought by foreign companies) - Increased employment from above mentioned sectors –

loss of income from ESS. 2.Technology

- Out dated technologies, monitoring - Breakdown of communication networks between

communities 3.Climate Change a. Flooding

- Lack of effective infrastructure’

65 | P a g e

- Strengthening of local/community level governing and management

SURPRISE - With improved infrastructure (roads) – potential for

encroachment by foreign governments seeking land and natural resources.

- NDIA - Loss of agricultural potential - Loss of biodiversity - Unstable food security - Inequitable distribution of resources, revenue, wealth - Loss of revenue from exports - Greater reliance on imported goods - Increase in poverty levels, cost of essential goods and

services PES

- Loss of income generated from PES - Higher degradation of land and deforestation -

Greater industrial potential Possible change in industrial centre’s from influx of

foreigners to remote areas.

66 | P a g e

Table 10 - Group 4 - Scenario Development


Scenario A Scenario B

Oil is found and Agricultural Diversification does not happen Agricultural Diversification happens and Oil is not found

Positive - emerging industry - value added - creation of jobs - rapid disposable income increase - foreign exchange influx - Improve infrastructure - Improve/Expansion of Education - Green technology - Better standards of living - Foreign/local investments - Remigration of skills

Negative - Oil spill - Carbon spike resulting effects on governance - Pollution - Increased social ills - Family disruption - Values readjusted - Depletion of skills from other industries

Positive - Food security - New and exotic varieties/areas - New technology - New Knowledge base - Agroforestry - More productive land use - Increased foreign exchange - Rebirth of cooperative spirit - Rehabilitation/re-vegetation of cleared areas - Improvement of water and land transportation/pathways

Negative

- Deforestation - Degradation of forested land - Disruption of ecosystem

Annex 8 – Ranking of scenarios

Table 11 - Results of Ranking exercise by Forum Participants

Individual Scenarios Most Relevant Group Most likely individual scenario

Most Desirable individual scenario

Group 1

Poor Natural Resource management practices & heavy dependence on fossil fuels

33 % ( Most relevant group of scenarios)

Poor Natural Resource management practices & less dependence on fossil fuels

7 %

Effective natural resource management practices and heavy dependence on non- renewable energy

23% (Most likely scenario)

Effective natural resource management practices in an renewable energy environment (green energy)

20% 23%

Group 2

More dependent on petrol import and having individualism

19%

More dependent on petrol import and having community spirit

7%

Oil/Petrol becomes main source of income for Guyana while having individualism

Oil/Petrol becomes main source of income for Guyana while having community spirit

Group 3

Continuity of ( Local and regional) effective policies and effective, transparent governmental body

19 %

14% 38% ( Most Desirable scenario)

Discontinuity of policies, no effective, transparent governmental body

Continuity of ( Local and regional) effective policies with no effective, transparent governmental body

7%

Discontinuity of policies, and effective, transparent governmental body

Group 4

Oil is found and Agricultural diversification does not happen

29 % 14% 31%

Agricultural diversification happens and Oil is not found

8%

Oil is found and Agricultural diversification happens

7%

Oil is not found and Agricultural diversification doesn’t happen

68 | P a g e

Annex 9 – List of participants

Table 12 - List of Participants

GROUP No. Name Organization

1 1. Raquel Thomas Iwokrama

1 2. Vanessa Benn Iwokrama

1 3. H. Sambhu Iwokrama

1 4. Anand Roopsind Iwokrama

1 5. Vanda Radzik Independent

1 6. Calvin Bernard University of Guyana

1 7. Damian Fernandes Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment

1 8. Patrick Chesney UNDP

1 9. Deirdre Jafferally COBRA

1 10. Gregory Hodge University of Guyana – Faulty of Agriculture

2 11. Micah Davis Iwokrama

2 12. Floria Francis Iwokrama

2 13. Johnnie Andres Iwokrama

2 14. Mike Williams NRDDB

2 15. Sydney Allicock Member of Parliament

2 16. Odacy Davis COBRA

2 17. Jay Mistry COBRA

2 18. Rebecca Xavier COBRA

2 19. Neville Calistro GOIP

3 20. Raynard Mc Andrew EPA

3 21. Andrew Mancey Independent

3 22. Shereeda Yusuf Office of Climate Change

3 23. Tomas de Stare Office of Climate Change

3 24. Annalise Bayney Independent

4 25. Michael Gouveia Ministry of Health

4 26. David Fredericks NARI

4 27. Denzil Roberts Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture

4 28. Isabella Bovolo COBRA

4 29. Hansrajie Sukhdeo GFC

Others

30. Ryan Benjamin COBRA

31. Rob Glastra COBRA

32. Sharissa Barrow Canadian High Commission

33. Joseph Singh Protected Areas Board

34. Lindsay Jones EU Guyana

35. Ms. Delicia News Update, Channel 65

guyana in 2030 - cobraprojectcobra.org/wp-content/uploads/finalreportfurture...guyana in 2030:...

Documents