Luis Davila's Blog

sharing thoughts on life, change and innovation…

What do I do at work?

So my mother has always asked me about what I do at work, and it has always been hard to explain. Below some of the one-line descriptions that I have given:
– I work to promote youth participation in international decision-making process;
– I help Fortune 500 companies empower young immigrants in New York through volunteerism;
– I help to facilitate a network of foundations supporting environmental work around the world;
– I support international climate change negotiations on helping to build the capacity of developing countries;
– I support international climate change negotiations on how to financially support developing countries in their efforts to address climate change.

Note how the one line has been getting longer throughout the years… But now that I work on Momentum for Change at the United Nations Climate Change secretariat, I can just say that I work on fighting climate change. I even get to share these amazing little videos that tell more about my work! Enjoy!

Short description of the UNFCCC 2012 Momentum for Change Lighthouse Actvities

Short trailer for the launch of Momentum for Change: Women for Results

Short trailer for the launch of Momentum for Change: Innovative Financing for Climate-friendly Investment Trailer

Posted by Luis on February 6, 2013 | Posted in Climate Change, environmentalism, global warming, international development, momentum for change | 1 Comment

Tools for raising awareness about climate change

A few weeks ago I helped to organize a workshop in the Dominican Republic to help governments in the region share best experiences in the fields of education, outreach and public participation in climate change. All of this is enshrined in Article 6 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). See the presentation/animation that I put together for the event:

I was also impressed with a video shared by the representative from Jamaica. It really leverages the power that music can play in raising the general public’s awareness about climate change. See below:

Pretty cool, eh?

Posted by davilalu on May 15, 2010 | Posted in Climate Change, environmentalism, international development | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

Conclusions from COP 15

United Nations Climate Change Conference 2009

Image via Wikipedia

After returning to Bonn, I have had a chance to reflect on the outcome of COP 15. The lack of success had a significant toll on the emotional and physical health of many of my colleagues and friends attending the Summit, but I want to focus on constructive solutions to some of the many problems that came up from COP 15.

1) Logistics: Over 40 thousand people ended up showing up in Copenhagen for COP 15, while the Bella Center only was able to hold 15 thousand people. It is incredible that the UN and the Danish government could not predict that logistical nightmare that many participants had to endure on their way in to the negotiations. It is imperative that for upcoming conferences, the UN and the host country recognize that climate change has become a top-political issue and will bring thousands of activists, government officials and media representatives interested in influencing the process. For example, passes could be mailed in advance or distributed in multiple venues throughout the host city, accreditation could reflect the venue’s size (!) and increasing efforts for video conferencing the sessions could be put in place.

2) Consensus vs. majority-based decision-making: One thing that was demonstrated at COP 15 was that the consensus-based model for decision making within the UNFCCC process is dated. The Copenhagen Accord was by no means the perfect outcome, but it still provided a good first step for on-going negotiations. The role of certain countries in bringing their national ideological struggles to the Summit, while denying the international community of some progress in its attempt to deal with climate change was regrettable. I hope that Parties to the UNFCCC reconsider this process, otherwise climate change issues may end up being discussed in a smaller, less democratic setting. 

3) The role of the media: For the first time in its history, a COP meeting attracted a level of media attention reserved for high-level meetings for (controversial) organizations such as the World Trade Organization (WTO). On one hand this demonstrates the level of political relevance that climate change has been able to achieve, but it also contributes to the circus atmosphere felt in Copenhagen. A colleague told me that when you have over 5 thousand journalists all seeking for the juiciest story, it is only inevitable for tensions to rise as politicians try to look good for audiences back home. For example, the media pressure may have led President Obama to rush an agreement with a limited amount of countries. I was particularly surprised to see journalists holding negotiating text before government officials did!  

4) The role of the United Nations: As I mentioned before, there is a serious risk for the negotiation process on climate change issues to be taken out of the UNFCCC context. This is indeed a very dangerous prospect! Not just for the obvious personal reasons, but because the UN, with all of its imperfections, still remains the only inclusive global forum. I do think that the process needs to be reformed (see point 2), but government officials, especially those from small developing countries should discourage any attempts to move the negotiation setting to grouping such as the G7 or G20.

I’ll make sure to keep sharing my thoughts on the UNFCCC process on this blog! I remain hopeful that COP 16 in Mexico will help us get back on track to save humanity from irreversible climate change.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Posted by davilalu on January 25, 2010 | Posted in Climate Change, environmentalism, global warming, international development, obama, politics | 3 Comments

Situación en Honduras / Situation in Honduras

(see English version at the bottom)
Estimad@s amig@s,
Saludos! Ya han pasado varios meses desde la ultima vez que escribí una nota en este blog. He estado repleto de trabajo y he participado activamente como voluntario en ONGs amigas, y en unas iniciativas personales las cuales compartiré muy pronto.  De cualquier forma, me sentí obligado a compartir unas líneas sobre la situación actual en Honduras.
Casi una docena de amig@s de toda la región, incluyendo activistas de derechos humanos en Honduras me han escrito compartiendo su indignación y preocupación por la situación política de ese país. Todos se han demostrado en contra del golpe de estado; algunos por razones netamente jurídicas (el golpe fue un acto ilegal) y otros por razones ideológicas (como activistas de derechos humanos la mayoría tiende a ser izquierdista). Mis amig@s y familiares venezolanos muestran una opinión totalmente opuesta. Ellos se manifiestan en apoyo del golpe de estado (al cual se refieren como vacío de poder), enfatizan que todos los poderes públicos están a favor del nuevo estatus quo (porque Zelaya quebrantó las leyes al convocar la encuesta) y demuestran alegría con la idea de que las actividades expansionistas del venezolano Hugo Chávez han sido detenidas. ¡Estas por supuesto son apreciaciones totalmente distintas de un mismo hecho! ¿Cómo es esto posible? Lo trataré de explicar…
Después de varios días de observación, mi análisis es el siguiente: se llevo a cabo un golpe de estado ilegal en Honduras, el cual es muy difícil de justificar. Los poderes públicos debieron haber empezado un proceso jurídico que pudiera separar al presidente de su cargo, si en realidad había cometido infracciones en contra de su nación. Esto hubiese mantenido el hilo institucional de Honduras y fortalecido sus instituciones. Pero, como analista de políticas internacionales también tengo que entender la realidad política e institucional actual en America Latina. El continente vive en un mundo de paradojas y realismo mágico que es difícil de comprender. Sea creado una moda mediante la cual gobernantes como Hugo Chávez, Evo Morales y Rafael Correa han usado el disfraz de la institucionalidad para consolidar su poder como presidentes, dejando al resto de los poderes públicos como sirvientes leales de sus proyectos políticos, en vez de vehículos de contrapeso dentro de un sistema verdaderamente democrático. O sea, no existen métodos legales ni elecciones confiables, que permitan una alternabilidad democrática en estos países (esto sirve de aclaratoria para mis amig@s que mencionan las elecciones como medio viable para la alternabilidad política en el continente). De una manera novedosa, para llamarlo de alguna forma, han logrado utilizar el sistema para disfrazar sus regimenes autoritarios bajo la manta de la democracia. Lo que existe, como existía en la Argentina de Perón y recientemente auspiciado por hombres como Norberto Ceresole (mentor de Chávez), es una relación pueblo-caudillo, que no deja espacios para otras instituciones democráticas. La gente se relaciona directamente con el líder, y los demás actores políticos solamente están como parte de un reparto de segunda que apoya lo que diga el líder en su momento (claro hay que notar que todos son hombres… este neo-caudillismo no dejo por fuera el machismo que nos caracteriza a los latinoamericanos, pero eso es para otro post…).
Dentro del marco de las relaciones internacionales, también se esta dando a lugar otra cosa fuera de lo común, en el que espacios como la OEA se están utilizando como herramientas para perpetuar el circulo vicioso en el que se encuentran los gobiernos de la denominada Alternativa Bolivariana para las Américas (ALBA). Se esta convirtiendo en un grupo de apoyo, alimentado mediante el uso de los petrodólares, mediante se defiende cualquier agresión en contra de los dirigentes narcisistas (como los llama Andrés Oppenheimer), en vez de defender a las instituciones democráticas en dichos países. Como diría el mismo Sr. Oppenheimer en una columna reciente, ¡la OEA se ha convertido en un espacio donde permiten que un dictador militar como Raúl Castro despotrique en contra de los ataques anti-democráticos del gobierno en  Honduras! (WTF?!?)
En fin, espero que mis amig@s hondureños puedan decidir el futuro de su país de una manera que refuerce su derecho a su autodeterminación como pueblo. De igual forma, creo que si el gobierno actual en Honduras se mantiene, crearía un precedente político fuera de lo común en el continente; si desconoces las leyes y la constitución te arriesgas a ser destituido por el Congreso y la Corte Suprema y puesto en un avión a un país vecino así seas el presidente del país. Por algo seria que ya Hugo Chávez empezó a decir que había que hacer hasta lo imposible para evitar que los partidos políticos que lo antagonizan obtengan cuotas de representación en la Asamblea Nacional de Venezuela…
Dear friends,
Greetings! It has been months since I posted to this blog, but I have been full of work and been actively volunteering with some NGOs. I also have started working on some other initiatives that I’ll share soon. However, I wanted to write a few lines about the current situation in Honduras.
Almost a dozen friends from across Latin America, including human rights activists in Honduras, have written heartfelt notes regarding the current political situation in this Central American country. They are all against the coup; some of them for legal reasons (the coup was completely illegal) and others for ideological reasons (as human rights activists they tend to be leftists for the most part). My friends and family members in Venezuela have a completely opposite point of view. They fully support the coup (they say that democratic institutions responded to a power vacuum), stress that all branches of government are in favor of maintaining the current status quo (given that Zelaya broke the laws by organizing a referendum) and are actually happy about stopping Chavez’s expansionist activities. These are obviously completely different observations of the same event! How is this possible? I’ll try to explain…
After paying attention to the situation for a few days, I think that the coup in Honduras was illegal and it is very hard to justify. All branches of government should have started a legal process against the president if he was really breaking Honduras’ laws. This would have maintained the rule of law and strengthened the country’s institutions. However, as an international relations analyst I also have to acknowledge the current political reality in Latin America. The continent lives in a really convoluted state of paradoxes and magical realism that is hard to explain. Regional leaders like Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales and Rafael Correa have started to use their electoral victories as a way to legitimize their power grab, whereas other branches of government no longer provide a system of check and balances. There are not any real legal methods or trustworthy electoral processes to provide a true sense of democracy with alternating political parties (I write this as a warning to my friends who claim that electoral processes can guarantee democratic institutions in these countries – Chavez, Morales and Correa control the entities that run the elections!). Today, these countries practice what used to be the norm in Peron’s Argentina and encouraged by men like Norberto Ceresole; a direct relationship between the people and their leader. This type of relationship does not allow other branches of government to hold real power, and are relinquished to satisfy the leader’s wishes (it is important to note that all these leaders are men, not women – this “neo-caudillismo” has not left out the chauvinism that characterizes Latin American societies, but I could discuss this in another post…).
Something very strange is also playing out within the world of international relations; the members of the so-called Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) are now using institutions such as the OAS as tools to perpetuate their authoritarian regimes. It is essentially becoming a support group for the leaders of these countries as they strengthen their internal positions, instead of a promoter of democratic institutions across the region. As Andres Oppenheimer recently wrote, the OAS has become a place where a military dictator such as Raul Castro attacks the new Honduras government for its lack of democratic credentials! (WTF?!?)
I hope that my Honduran friends are able to decide their fate in their own terms. I also think that if the current government is able to hold on to power, it will create a huge political precedent in the region; if a president disregards the constitution, he/she is risking a coup supported by all other branches of government. No wonder Hugo Chavez recently expressed his concern about potential gains by political enemies within the Venezuelan National Assembly…

Posted by davilalu on July 5, 2009 | Posted in international development, politics | Comment