Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Kadechoora microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behaviour and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 536 ha in Kadechoora microwatershed in Yadgir taluk of Yadgir district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought- prone with an average annual rainfall of 866 mm, of which about 652 mm is received during south–west monsoon, 138 mm during north-east and the remaining 76 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 71 per cent is covered by soils, 29 per cent by water bodies, settlements and mining and industrial areas. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below. The soils belong to 9 soil series and 9 soil phases (management units) and 4 land management units. The length of crop growing period is about 120-150 days starting from the 1st week of June to 4th week of October. From the master soil map, several interpretative and thematic maps like land capability, soil depth, surface soil texture, soil gravelliness, available water capacity, soil slope and soil erosion were generated. Soil fertility status maps for macro and micronutrients were generated based on the surface soil samples collected at every 250 m grid interval. Land suitability for growing 26 major agricultural and horticultural crops were assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated. About 71 per cent area is suitable for agriculture and 29 per cent is not suitable for agriculture but well suited for forestry, pasture, agro-forestry, silvi-pasture, recreation, mining, installation of wind mills and as habitat for wildlife. About 3 per cent of the soils are moderately deep (75-100cm), about 59 per cent deep (100-150cm) to very deep (>150 cm) and 9 per cent are shallow to moderately shallow (25-75 cm) soils. About 62 per cent of the area has clayey soils, 8 per cent loamy soils and one per cent sandy soils at the surface. Entire area has non-gravelly soils. About 59 per cent of the area has soils that are very high (>200mm/m) in available water capacity, less than one per cent medium (100-150 mm/m) and about 12 per cent low (51-100 mm/m) to very low (9.0) in soil reaction. The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 0.75%) in organic carbon. An area of 29 per cent has soils that are low (57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus. About 7 per cent medium (145-337 kg/ha) and 64 per cent high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium. Available sulphur is low (20 ppm) in about one per cent area. Available boron is low (1.0 ppm) in about 22 per cent. About 29 per cent area has soils that are deficient (4.5 ppm). Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils. About 69 per cent area has soils that are deficient (0.6 ppm). The land suitability for 26 major crops grown in the microwatershed was assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (S1) and moderately suitable (S2) are given below. It is however to be noted that a given soil may be suitable for various crops but what specific crop to be grown may be decided by the farmer looking to his capacity to invest on various inputs, marketing infrastructure, market price and finally the demand and supply position. Land suitability for various crops in the Kadechoora microwatershed Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Sorghum - 378 (70) Sapota - - Maize - 44 (8) Guava - - Red gram - 333 (62) Pomegranate - 333 (62) Bajra - 377 (70) Jackfruit - - Ground nut - 22 (4) Jamun - 331 (62) Sunflower - 334 (62) Musambi - 333 (62) Cotton - 377 (70) Lime - 333 (62) Bengalgram 16 (3) 362 (67) Cashew - - Chilli - 377 (70) Custard apple - 378 (70) Tomato - 44 (8) Amla - 377 (70) Drumstick - 333 (62) Tamarind - 333 (62) Mulberry - - Marigold - 377 (70) Mango - - Chrysanthemum - 377 (70) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 4 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and horticulture crops that helps in maintaining the ecological balance in the microwatershed Maintaining soil-health is vital to crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested to these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc., Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required. As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges, that are edible, ecological and produce lot of biomass that helps to restore the ecological balance in the microwatershed FINDINGS OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY The survey was conducted in Kadechur is located at North latitude 160 32' 18.441" and 160 31' 7.07" and East longitude 770 20' 40.809'' and 770 18' 25.451" covering an area of about 536.24 ha coming unde Kadechoora and Sowrashtralli villages of Yadagiri taluk. Socio-economic analysis of Kadechur micro watersheds of Kadechur subwatershed, Yadgiri taluk & District indicated that, out of the total sample of 39 farmers were sampled in Kadechur micro-watershed among households surveyed 7 (17.95%) were marginal, 20 (51.28%) were small, 4 (10.26 %) were semi medium and 2 (5.13 %) were medium farmers. 6 landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey. The population characteristics of households indicated that, there were 109 (57.07%) men and 82 (42.93 %) were women. The average population of landless was 3.5, marginal farmers were 4.9, small farmers were 5.4, semi medium farmers were 4 and medium farmers were 6.5. Majority of the respondents (47.12%) were in the age group of 16-35 years. Education level of the sample households indicated that, there were 49.74 per cent illiterates, 41.88 per cent pre university education and 6.81 per cent attained graduation. About, 69.23 per cent of household heads practicing agriculture and 17.95 per cent of the household heads were engaged as agricultural labourers. Agriculture was the major occupation for 45.03 per cent of the household members. In the study area, 74.36 per cent of the households possess katcha house and 17.95 per cent possess pucca house. The durable assets owned by the households showed that, 84.62 per cent possess TV, 15.38 per cent possess mixer grinder, 97.44 per cent possess mobile phones and 15.38 per cent possess motor cycles. Farm implements owned by the households indicated that, 20.51 per cent of the households possess plough, 5.13 per cent possess tractor, 20.51 per cent possess bullock cart and 7.69 per cent possess sprayer. Regarding livestock possession by the households, 5.13 per cent possess local cow. The average labour availability in the study area showed that, own labour men available in the micro watershed was 13.03, women available in the micro watershed was 1.51, hired labour (men) available was 1.80 and hired labour (women) available was 8.80. Further, 5.13 per cent of the households opined that hired labour was inadequate during the agricultural season. 2 Out of the total land holding of the sample respondents 90.14 per cent (52.64 ha) of the area is under dry condition and the remaining 9.86 per cent area is irrigated land. There were 3.00 live bore wells and 1.00 dry bore wells among the sampled households. Bore well was the major source of irrigation for 7.69 per cent of the households. The major crops grown by sample farmers are Red gram, Groundnut, Cotton, Jowar and cropping intensity was recorded as 100.00 per cent. Out of the sample households 100.00 percent possessed bank account and 5.13 per cent of them have savings in the account. About 56.41 per cent of the respondents borrowed credit from various sources. Among the credit borrowed by households, 20.83 per cent have borrowed loan from commercial banks and 41.67 per cent from co-operative/Grameena bank. Majority of the respondents (86.67%) have borrowed loan for agriculture purpose. Regarding the opinion on institutional sources of credit, 25.00 per cent of the households opined that credit helped to perform timely agricultural operations, while, only 75.00 per cent respondents opined that loan amount was adequate to fulfil their requirement. The per hectare cost of cultivation for Red gram, Groundnut, Cotton and Jowar was Rs.31283.52, 33327.81, 36058.22 and 25644.97 with benefit cost ratio of 1:1.42, 1: 3.50, 1: 1.40 and1: 0.56 respectively. Further, 17.95 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate. The average annual gross income of the farmers was Rs. 131225.64 in microwatershed, of which Rs. 88994.87 comes from agriculture. Sampled households have grown 15 horticulture trees and 21 forestry trees together in the fields and back yards. About 2.56 per cent of the households shown interest to cultivate horticultural crops. Households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 3482.05 for land development. Source of funds for additional investment is concerned, 38.46 per cent depends on own funds and 5.13 per cent depends on bank loan for land development activities. Regarding marketing channels, 35.90 per cent of the households have sold agricultural produce to the local/village merchants, while, 38.46 per cent have sold in regulated markets. Further, 66.67 per cent of the households have used tractor for the transport of agriculture commodity. Majority of the farmers (79.49%) have experienced soil and water erosion problems in the watershed and 82.05 per cent of the households were interested towards soil testing. 3 Fire was the major source of fuel for domestic use for 89.74 per cent of the households and 12.82 per cent households has LPG connection. Piped supply was the major source for drinking water for 97.44 per cent of the households. Electricity was the major source of light for 100.00 per cent of the households. In the study area, 38.46 per cent of the households possess toilet facility. Regarding possession of PDS card, 97.44 per cent of the households possessed BPL card and 2.56 per cent of the household's were not having ration cards. Households opined that, the requirement of cereals (64.10%), pulses (69.23%) and oilseeds (38.46%) are adequate for consumption. Farming constraints experienced by households in the micro watersheds were lower fertility status of the soil (79.49%) wild animal menace on farm field (79.49%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (43.59%), inadequacy of irrigation water (69.23%), high cost of fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (82.05%), high rate of interest on credit (82.05%), low price for the agricultural commodities (76.92%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (53.85%), inadequate extension services (28.21%), lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (71.79%) and Less rainfall (5.13%). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project
Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Mavanahalli-3 microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behaviour and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 371 ha in Mavanahalli-3 microwatershed in Yadgir taluk and district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as droughtprone with an average annual rainfall of 866 mm, of which about 652 mm is received during south–west monsoon, 138 mm during north-east and the remaining 76 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 61 per cent is covered by soils, 37 per cent by mining/industrial area and 2 per cent by others (water body). The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below. The soils belong to 5 soil series and 5 soil phases (management units) and 2 land management units. The length of crop growing period is about 120-150 days starting from the 1st week of June to 4th week of October. From the master soil map, several interpretative and thematic maps like land capability, soil depth, surface soil texture, soil gravelliness, available water capacity, soil slope and soil erosion were generated. Soil fertility status maps for macro and micronutrients were generated based on the surface soil samples collected at every 250 m grid interval. Land suitability for growing 26 major agricultural and horticultural crops were assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated. Entire 61 per cent land area of the microwatershed is suitable for agriculture. About 13 per cent of the soils are moderately deep (75-100cm), 48 per cent soils are deep (100-150cm) to very deep (>150 cm). Entire cultivated area of 61 percent has clayey soils at the surface. Entire cultivated area of 61 per cent is non-gravelly. About 48 per cent of the area has soils that are very high (>200mm/m) in available water capacity and 13 per cent is medium (101-150 mm/m). Entire cultivated area of 61 per cent in the microwatershed has very gently sloping (1-3%) lands. Small area of 9.0) in soil reaction. The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils are dominantly 0.75%) in organic carbon. An area of 61 per cent has soils that are low (337 kg/ha) in available potassium. Available sulphur is low (20 ppm) in 18 per cent area of the microwatershed. Available boron is low (1.0 ppm) in about 16 per cent area of the microwatershed. About 41 per cent area has soils that are deficient (4.5 ppm). Available manganese and copper are sufficient in the entire cultivated areas of the microwatershed. Entire cultivated area of 61 per cent in the microwatershed is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in available zinc. The land suitability for 26 major crops grown in the microwatershed was assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (S1) and moderately suitable (S2) are given below. It is however to be noted that a given soil may be suitable for various crops but what specific crop to be grown may be decided by the farmer looking to his capacity to invest on various inputs, marketing infrastructure, market price and finally the demand and supply position. Land suitability for various crops in the Mavanahalli-3 microwatershed Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Sorghum - 226(61) Sapota - - Maize - - Guava - - Red gram - 226(61) Pomegranate - 226(61) Bajra - 226(61) Jackfruit - - Ground nut - - Jamun - 180(48) Sunflower - 226(61) Musambi - 226(61) Cotton - 226(61) Lime - 226(61) Bengalgram - 226(61) Cashew - - Chilli - 226(61) Custard apple - 226(61) Tomato - - Amla - 226(61) Drumstick - 226(61) Tamarind - 180(48) Mulberry - - Marigold - 226(61) Mango - - Chrysanthemum - 226(61) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 2 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops that help in maintaining the ecological balance in the microwatershed. Maintaining soil-health is vital to crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested to these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc. Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required. As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges, that are edible and produce lot of biomass that helps to restore the ecological balance in the micro watershed. FINDINGS OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY The survey was conducted in Mavanahalli-3 is located at North latitude 160 31' 9.526" and 160 29' 31.144" and East longitude 770 19' 24.684'' and 770 18' 24.341" covering an area of about 374.73 ha coming under Mavinahalli and Kadechoora villages of Yadagiri taluk. Socio-economic analysis of Mavanahalli-3 micro watersheds of Kadechur subwatershed, Yadgiri taluk & District indicated that, out of the total sample of 34 farmers were sampled in Mavanahalli-3 micro-watershed among households surveyed 8 (23.53%) were marginal, 8 (23.53%) were small, 11 (32.35 %) were semi medium and 2 (5.88 %) were medium farmers. 5 landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey. The population characteristics of households indicated that, there were 92 (57.14%) men and 68 (42.24 %) were women. The average population of landless was 3.6, marginal farmers were 3.1, small farmers were 4.1, semi medium farmers were 6.8 and medium farmers were 5. Majority of the respondents (46.58%) were in the age group of 16-35 years. Education level of the sample households indicated that, there were 60.87 per cent of illiterates, 5.59 per cent of them had primary school education, 11.18 per cent middle school education, and 11.18 per cent high school education, 1.86 per cent of them had PUC education, 6.83 per cent attained graduation and 1.24 them had other education. About, 58.82 per cent of household heads practicing agriculture and 29.41 per cent of the household heads were engaged as agricultural labourers. Agriculture was the major occupation for 31.06 per cent of the household members. In the study area, 97.06 per cent of the households possess katcha house. The durable assets owned by the households showed that, 88.24 per cent possess TV, 35.29 per cent possess mixer grinder, 100.00 per cent possess mobile phones and 14.71 per cent possess motor cycles. Farm implements owned by the households indicated that, 11.76 per cent of the households possess Bullock Cart, 35.29 per cent possess plough and 2.94 per cent possess Power Tiller, 14.71 per cent possess Weeder, 5.88 per cent possess tractor, 2.94 per cent possess Sprinkler and 2.94 per cent possess Harvester. Regarding livestock possession by the households, 5.88 per cent possess local cow and 2.94 per cent possess buffalo. The average labour availability in the study area showed that, own labour men available in the micro watershed was 1.79, women available in the micro watershed was 1.71, hired labour (men) available was 8.47 and hired labour (women) available was 8.15. 2 Further, 11.76 per cent of the households opined that hired labour was inadequate during the agricultural season. Out of the total land holding of the sample respondents 63.84 per cent (45.82 ha) of the area is under dry condition and the remaining 36.16 per cent area is irrigated land. There were 13.00 live bore wells and 13.00 dry bore wells among the sampled households. Bore well was the major source of irrigation for 38.24 per cent of the households. The major crops grown by sample farmers are Red gram, Cotton, Grountnut, Sorghum and Paddy and cropping intensity was recorded as 101.00 per cent. Out of the sample households 85.29 percent possessed bank account and 52.94 per cent of them have savings in the account. About 67.65 per cent of the respondents borrowed credit from various sources. Among the credit borrowed by households, 47.83 per cent have borrowed loan from commercial banks and 8.70 per cent from co-operative/Grameena bank. Majority of the respondents (100.00%) have borrowed loan for agriculture purpose. Regarding the opinion on institutional sources of credit, 100.00 per cent of the households opined that credit helped to perform timely agricultural operations. Per hectare cost of cultivation for Red gram, Cotton, Grountnut, Sorghum and Paddy was Rs.26344.09, 28097.99, 55665.67, 30126.66, and 56739.94 with benefit cost ratio of 1:1.80, 1: 1.50, 1: 0.70, 1: 1.40 and 1:1.60 respectively. Further, 26.47 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 8.82 per cent of the households have opined that the green fodder was adequate. The average annual gross income of the farmers was Rs. 100411.76 in microwatershed, of which Rs. 67470.59 comes from agriculture. Sampled households have grown 3 horticulture trees and 56 forestry trees together in the fields and back yards. Households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 676.47 for land development and Rs. 3529.41 for irrigation facility. Source of funds for additional investment is concerned, 29.41 per cent depends on bank loan for land development activities. Regarding marketing channels, 38.24 per cent of the households have sold agricultural produce to the local/village merchants, while, 50.00 per cent have sold in regulated markets. Further, 88.24 per cent of the households have used tractor for the transport of agriculture commodity. Majority of the farmers (85.29%) have experienced soil and water erosion problems in the watershed and 85.29 per cent of the households were interested towards soil testing. 3 Fire was the major source of fuel for domestic use for 44.12 per cent of the households and 55.88 per cent households has LPG connection. Piped supply was the major source for drinking water for 100.00 per cent of the households. Electricity was the major source of light for 100.00 per cent of the households. In the study area, 50.00 per cent of the households possess toilet facility. Regarding possession of PDS card, 94.12 per cent of the households possessed BPL card and 5.88 per cent of the household's were not having ration cards. Households opined that, the requirement of cereals (61.76%), pulses (61.76%) and oilseeds (55.88%) are adequate for consumption. Farming constraints experienced by households in the micro watersheds were lower fertility status of the soil (85.29%) wild animal menace on farm field (85.29%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (55.88%), inadequacy of irrigation water (61.76%), high cost of fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (85.29%), high rate of interest on credit (85.29%), low price for the agricultural commodities (85.29%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (23.53%), inadequate extension services (64.71%) and lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (79.41%). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project
Transcript of an oral history interview with General Gordon R. Sullivan, conducted by Sarah Yahm at the Sullivan Museum and History Center on 23 April 2015, as part of the Norwich Voices oral history project. Gordon Sullivan was a member of the Norwich University Class of 1959. After graduating from Norwich University, he served in a variety of Army command and staff assignments in the United States, Germany, Korea and Vietnam. He became Chief of Staff of the U. S. Army on 21 June 1991. The Sullivan Museum and History Center at Norwich University was named in his honor. Topics of interest within the oral history include General Sullivan's Army career as well as his legacy, philosophy, and activities after his retirement from the U.S. Army. ; 1 Gordon Sullivan, NU 1959, Oral History Interview April 23, 2015 Interviewed by Sarah Yahm GORDON SULLIVAN: I have often talked -- I talk a lot to troops and groups and so forth and so on and I'm very quick to tell them that I have been in and around the United States Army since 1955 in one form or another, either as a cadet at Norwich when I took my oath in the summer -- late summer of 1955 -- and obviously as a commissioned officer in the United States Army since 1959, 1995. Then, in my retired life, other than a two-year period when I was doing something in the commercial sector which I frankly didn't -- it wasn't for me. I knew it wasn't for me. I did okay at it but I didn't want to continue doing it. The job was open as the president of the Association of the United States Army, which is the Army's professional association, designed to tell the story of land power and the story of the Army and to do whatever we could to help soldiers and their families. So, in reality, I've spent my adult life in or around the United States Army. Since I retired, in addition to the association and the United States Army, I've done a couple of things which, to me, fit with the way I wanted to live my life. One was to create with three other retired officers an organization known as the Marshall Legacy Institute, Marshall being General George C. Marshall, former Secretary of State who, in 1948, created the Marshall Plan; he and others who worked for him. The essential nature of the Marshall Plan was to help war-torn nations recover in a collaborative way, not in a Big Brother way where we went in and did all the work and they stood by and watched us. It was where we collaborated with them and enabled them to help themselves. So, by happenstance, I was asked, since I had been the chief of staff of the Army to help commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the creation of the Marshall Plan. I found out that what they wanted was celebratory activities; a cocktail party and so forth and so on, which didn't interest me. So, I found some kindred spirits and we created the Marshall Legacy Institute, which has been around since 1997, and we have over 200 mine detection dogs out around the world. We have raised the money. The State Department has supported us, and these dogs are in some of the worst places in the world, enabling others to take landmines, a silent killer, out of the ground, and to provide safe living and a way of being; food, commerce, and so forth in war-torn countries such as in the Balkans, in Afghanistan, Iraq, African countries like Angola, one of the most mine-infested countries in the world, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, so forth and so on. We have -- those dogs have cleared, along with their indigenous handlers, millions and millions of square you-name-it -- square kilometers or yards or whatever, whatever metric you want, ground for people to live safely. I view that as sort of right up along with everything else I did when I was in uniform. It's the same kind of a business, making the world safe for others to live, save lives, not take lives, save lives. As a part of -- for some reason, let's put it this way. Sometimes in life, things happen that you really don't -- you didn't expect and so forth. I was asked to be a part of a study group in 2006. The study group was on -- conducted by CNA. That's otherwise known in a previous life as the Center for Naval Analysis. Well, I'm an Army general and it was kind of odd to be asked to do something 2 with the CNA but I was asked to do it and I did. It seemed like a good idea at the time. It was to look at the national security implications of global climate change. Well, the implications of global climate change, no matter how you feel about it, the trends of anything related to climate are going in the wrong direction; not the specifics. If you argue point data, there is always someone who has better data or different data. So, that becomes very contentious. All right, I think it was twelve retired admirals and generals were on this study group and by some fluke, I guess, I became the chairman of this group. We published a study in '07 which said that climate change is a national security threat or presents a national security threat to the United States of America. Failed and failing states, whether they failed because of drought or political reasons or why they failed, become like a Petri dish within which extremist groups grow, and that goes from Somalia to the Sudan and you name it; Syria and so forth. Syria was later but the ones we were dealing with at the time were mainly in the Middle East and Africa and we could see it. So, we published that study and it got some attention. Actually, we, within reason, steered away from the maelstrom of political stuff because we were the least likely people to say it. All of us were mostly operators. Now, we had one astronaut, a naval officer, and one of them was a nuclear -- you know, you would expect the Navy because of the nuclear-powered submarines and ships and so forth. So, they were scientists, really, and they had access to data and they knew about the phenomenon. But, the rest of us were either fighter pilots or I'm a ground combat guy or Marine -- Marines; you know, just people with a lot of experience in international stuff and defense and security. So, anyway, that study was replicated in '14 and said, "Well, this is what we said in '07. It's worse." Things got worse, and that's what we said; that not only was it bad then, but it's worse today. Obviously, we had Syria and various other garden spots on the table; Syria, Libya, on and on and on. Arab Spring was caused, in many places, since -- Arab Spring, what became known as Arab Spring, was caused by drought or one of the causes was drought in Russia, which -- and the Russians stopped exporting wheat because they had to -- they had a shortage of wheat so they stopped exporting it. That caused ripples throughout North Africa and Mesopotamia, specifically, Syria. SARAH YAHM: So, I have a couple questions for you, and I do want to -- you know, I feel like we're talking now for a little bit and I do want to sit down when I have more time to prepare and really give a couple hours. GS: I want you to do that. What I'm telling you is I put it all together and my time here at Norwich here as the chairman and it's all a piece. SY: Well, that's what I sense is that you felt this urgency to come in today. GS: I want you to know that in case -- I'm now 77, almost 78. I want to take advantage of you being here, me meeting you, so that you know how I really feel about it. SY: So, yeah, so you feel this urgency about your legacy. So, what -- so, you're telling me something now that it seems like you're afraid isn't in the historical record or won't be in the historical record. GS: It's not. SY: So, is it the idea that this global warming work, this landmine work, that is all part and parcel -- GS: That's all a part and parcel of how I view my life.3 SY: OK, and so you see this linear thread that goes through your life. GS: Yes. SY: So, if you were to articulate the values of that linear thread, how would you articulate it? GS: I think -- I don't know it. I think that when I sit here today, this morning I was talking about -- I was introducing these 200 things that you don't know about Norwich, and I said to myself, well, there's a lot I don't know about Norwich but I know about myself. I don't think I'm unique, by the way, in the history of Norwich. I think I'm just one of the people who went here. So, you have this museum which, you know, is -- I find this hard to say, but, okay, there's this museum here, and you've got some of my stuff. It doesn't -- it's hard -- yeah, how do -- what do I think? How do -- there's some stuff out there. There's nobody but me who could tell you why I think some of those artifacts tell the story. SY: No, you need to interpret the story of your life. GS: Yeah, I need to interpret it. SY: You need to interpret it. GS: It's me. I don't think -- SY: Absolutely. GS: I don't think -- I can go to things out there. I can show you one panel that shows me as a young man struggling to figure out who I am and Norwich, my buddies, this institution enabled me to mature and they didn't throw me out, because I was, struggling. I don't mean that in a -- I was struggling to figure out how I would fit in the world, and I don't think I'm unique and Norwich helped me do that. Okay? SY: Absolutely. GS: So, on the same panel, it goes from me being, you know, this guy I was who was whatever. I'm not apologizing for any of it because I don't have anything to apologize for. But, I can tell you it went from somebody who was immature to the chief of staff of the Army with the woman I was married to for 49 years standing beside me when I became the chief of staff in the Army. I will tell you, I'd do it all the same way and marry the same woman. SY: I think your vulnerability matters, and I think that's something that needs to go in the record, too -- the confusion of being a 20-year old, right? GS: Yeah, the confusion of being a 20-year old and now 70 -- in my late seventies. I'm reasonably healthy but I know my own -- I mean, I'm human. I've figured it out obviously since my wife essentially died, you know. I mean, well, she did die. I'm also struggling. I'm not struggling with it. I think I've accommodated. I understand it all but I know, okay, that's the way it is, and I want you to know it. SY: Yeah, and you're evaluating. You're in a moment in your life of evaluation, right? GS: Yeah, right. What did I do? What did I do with my life? SY: Yeah, and that has to be richer than a list of accomplishments, right? GS: It's not the accomplishments. It's what do you -- how does it fit? I think I am occupying a very large part of the space there, and there are many people like me and I know that, and they should be here, too. SY: Yeah, and we're actually -- I mean, we are collecting their voices, but maybe the key is to figure out how you're representative of a moment.4 GS: Yeah, whatever. You're the expert. I'm just here, and I don't think for one minute -- I have a hard time telling people. I talk about this as 'the museum.' SY: Not the 'Sullivan Museum.' GS: No, no, I don't say that. I have never said it. SY: So, we'll sit down and we'll talk and we'll have you curate the story of your life, you know, and that will help enrich our museum. I also think -- I mean, you oversaw a messy century, you know. The second half of the 20th century was a messy century, right? GS: Well, yeah, here's the cycle, though. I just came back from Germany. I was in the headquarters of the United States Army Europe. I went to Europe for the first time in 1965, 50 years ago, when the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact, was right up against the border. I went up into a part of Germany. I was about 40 miles from the inner German border in a tank battalion. I later commanded a tank brigade -- an armored brigade -- in the same division, the largest brigade in the US Army at the time; five maneuver battalions, three tank battalions, two mechanized infantry battalions, about 5000 men and women. There were some women. The Cold War -- so the Cold War is over. I go 50 years later. Twenty years ago, Russia was sort of off the screen militarily. So, I'm sitting in the room and I look out at this expanse of Europe and in Eastern Ukraine, there's this major penetration, this major red thrust. What goes around comes around. In my life, I have gone from an officer who spent twelve and a half years in Germany during the Cold War, became the chief of staff in the Army. I saw the Wall come down and now this, where the Russians are back moving again. I mean, it's -- what goes around comes around, and I'm seeing the nation-state, the concept of nation-states being questioned. Will the Middle East unravel so that it's just tribes? This is -- I mean, this has been in my lifetime, and I've been a part of it, in a sense. SY: No, in a very concrete sense. Does it lead you to despair? Does it lead you to -- GS: No, it doesn't lead me to despair. It leads me to understand that the cycles of history have a way of repeating themselves and it's the human interaction. That's missteps. Did we handle it right? Did we appreciate how -- well, how Russia would perceive what happened when the Cold War ended. How would the Russian people perceive it? Clearly, as an amateur looking at it, people say, "Well, Russia needs --." Russia has needs like any country, and they have always wanted to have the near abroad as a buffer. So, let's say that's real. Let's say that's true for the sake of argument. Then, now we have a nationalist. That's what he is. Putin is a nationalist and he has turned the switch. They sign up politically. They sign up. SY: Yeah, they always do. GS: They always do. They always have, and they are again, and here it is. So, look, that doesn't -- I don't think I'm the first Norwich grad to figure that out. I don't -- I wouldn't -- but it's been a part of my life, and I am what I am. What I am, for better or worse, is a soldier. I'm just a soldier that's retired. SY: Yeah. Could you talk a little about the connection -- so, you know, most of your life was concrete soldiering, right? GS: Yes, real soldiering. SY: Real soldiering. Now, you're talking about specifically this landmine work. How do you see the two as connected, because in one part of your life, you were in charge of --5 GS: Putting landmines in the ground. SY: Yes. GS: Right, and I wasn't -- I am a defender of that because it protects soldiers and so forth and so on because they do protect soldiers. It's one of these strange weapons. They protect soldiers and they kill soldiers. OK, so, in 1997, when I and three combat arms colonels -- retired colonels -- created this thing, this entity, we wanted to do something to help others and it was the mines. Get the mines out of the ground. Everybody was talking mines are bad but they were talking about it. Mines are bad, right? Got it. What are you going to do about it? We wanted to do something about it. It wasn't to philosophize. It was to take them out of the ground, help other people take them out of the ground; like to make things -- make something happen, action-oriented. That's more important to me than all the great ideas of the world. Yeah, global hunger -- I've got it. You know, make the world mine-free. Well, okay, if you want to take mines out of the ground, you can. We've actually, along with others -- there are other ways to take mines out of the ground mechanically and that's a lot of what Princess Diana was involved with -- Princess Diana was involved with and now Harry -- Prince -- SY: Yeah, the royal British family, yeah. GS: So, anyway, we -- so that's -- to me, that fits, okay? SY: Yeah, it's not something -- GS: Now, whether anybody else thinks it fits or not, I don't know, but to me it does. SY: But, to you, it doesn't seem like a contradiction to you? GS: It's not a contradiction to me. SY: Could you talk more about that? GS: Why? What? SY: Well, because I'm curious about getting at your sort of philosophy and understanding so that it does seem part and parcel of the same work. GS: It seems part and parcel of the same work because the country says -- I don't know where we are on the treaty, whether -- the chiefs have said, of which I was one; you know, in my former life, I was one of the Joint Chiefs, a member of the Joint Chiefs. We're protecting South Korea. We're partners with the South Koreans -- Republic of Korea -- and the UN protecting South Korea. Part of that defense involves the demilitarized zone, which is heavily mined. At certain points in Afghanistan and Iraq, I would suspect that there are mines which are -- you can turn them on and off. That type of protection is used, not much but it is periodically. It's there. It's available if they want to use them. I don't view that as much of a contradiction. These things are, as I say, you turn them on and you turn them off. You put them back in your rucksack and unless somebody hits one with a round or something, they're not going to detonate. SY: Yeah, they're safer. GS: Safer. SY: They're not going to get women and children 20 years later. GS: No. That's not -- no, that's not going to happen. SY: You know -- GS: So, anyway, I guess I'm a theory to practice guy. Okay, I've got the theory. I've got the concept and, okay, let's do something about it then.6 SY: That's the thread that goes through your life. GS: That's the thread for me. Let's do something about it. So, global climate change -- national security issue. I came up here and talked about that. You have the speech that I gave down here, and I gave another one at the Society of American Military Engineers, which -- a national security issue for the United States of America is -- and an economic issue and a health issue is we're running out of water -- fresh water -- fresh, potable water. Now, the Corps of Engineers, which US Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for a lot of that in some sense. So, I represent -- I'm trying to tell the Army story, right? It's my job -- Association of the United States Army. The Corps of Engineers is a part of it. The Army Medical Department -- just the researchers and medical researchers just discovered a vaccine which prevents Ebola. Walter Reed was an Army officer. So, we -- Lewis and Clark were Army people. SY: Do you remember, you know, the kid you were at Norwich -- the 20-year old kid -- and the world you lived in then? GS: Yes. SY: What do you think he would have thought of this particular world we're in now, of this US, of this globe? GS: Well, there's some that wouldn't have surprised him, given that I was a history major. I was quoted in the Boston Globe in 1989. I was giving a talk in Cambridge, Massachusetts in the Sonesta. I was at a conference. I was a three-star at the time. I was the chief of operations in the United States Army and before I got up to speak -- I was to speak on doctrine, Army doctrine -- I was handed a note that said, "Heads up. The Wall just came down and people are streaming and streaming into Berlin -- West Berlin." The heads-up was that the press was in the room. So, anyway, I gave my -- whatever I was going to say. The first question I was asked was, "The Berlin Wall just opened. What do you think?" I gave an honest answer. SY: What did you think? GS: I said, "I don't know what I don't know." I didn't. I mean, I was -- you know, I was obviously pleased. That was apparent, but in the back of my mind, I didn't -- you couldn't -- I couldn't predict it. SY: You couldn't -- GS: I couldn't then -- I couldn't predict it and I wasn't going to. SY: Your whole life had been a Cold War world. GS: Yes, I understand that, and I couldn't -- I didn't know what it would mean. Well, what it meant was genocide in the Balkans. What it has meant is a lot of things that aren't good. The whole world that we knew is over time coming apart, like the nation-state. Remember what I said earlier here? Will the nation-state, which was created by -- at the end of World War I -- will those boundaries hold in the Middle East? What about the Balkans? What about the Baltic nations? It's all a part. My uncertainty then -- it's all -- it's still playing out. What's the role of the United States of America? I have no idea. SY: What do you think it should be? GS: Well, I think everybody expects the United States of America to be what it has been since the end of World War II, like the United States of America, the leader; in some sense, the leader. I think we're struggling with that. Are we? Do we really want to be the leader? 7 What about a world where the United States is a reluctant leader? What kind of a world is that? I don't know. That's beyond me. All I know is what I know. That, by the way, if you can figure that out, all I know is what I know or what I feel -- SY: Yeah. Did you have any moments when you had -- when you were talking about you feel gut reactions that really helped you out, that steered you in the right direction? GS: A lot of time, a lot of time. I suppose there is some type that you could say this guy is this type of person. I'm pretty good at reading people. I can read -- I think I am, anyway. That may be a conceit of mine, but I think I am, and I can -- I don't -- yeah, sometimes I go by feel. Sometimes, when I'm doing things, which is why I like the give and take in a meeting, why I need to hear, I want to hear from people. I like ideas. I like the dialog because I learn from it. SY: Yeah, we're thinking a lot about this citizen soldier idea, right, which means a lot of different things to different people but to some people it means having the courage to stand up for what you believe in in moments where it's scary. Can you think of moments like that in your life where you pushed back out of your gut and it was scary? GS: Yeah, well, when you go up to Capitol Hill and you tell people things that politically they don't agree with or if the senator comes from a coal-producing state and you're there telling him that, hey, this climate change is serious, and certainly, one of the causes is carbon, hydrocarbons, whatever, in the air, okay, now don't ask me how many parts per million but for some reason, it's warmer in the last 10 years, like 4 or 5 of the years have been the warmest in recorded history. Something is going on which is warming the planet up. Is that a part of it? Perhaps, probably. You know, he's going to come back -- he or she is going to come back at you and say, "Well, you're smoking dope but it's not. It happens all the time, right?" Well, yeah, but you've got a lot of trends that are going in the wrong direction. Okay, but at any rate, yeah, sure, you know. People said, "Well, we need -- the country needs a peace dividend," which is all well and good. Right after the Cold War, the country did need a peace dividend but at some point, you get so small -- the Army gets so small that you wind up fighting wars. You fight two wars and the strength of the Army -- active Army -- was such that you asked too much from too few and you wind up with soldiers who are psychologically damaged because the same men and women went back and forth and back and forth. You think that's popular to say that? I don't care. It's true. SY: Yeah, I mean, right. You spent a lot of time in Capitol Hill, obviously the most partisan place in the country and you served under -- you were chief of staff under a Republican and then a Democrat, right? GS: That's correct. SY: How did you navigate that partisan world? GS: You just -- well, you know, first of all, you don't -- you're not partisan. I'm not partisan. Nobody knows what I am and that's the way I like it. I'm my own person. I'm essentially an independent and I decide. Frankly, many people like me -- I didn't vote when I was a chief of staff and before. I just didn't vote. SY: Talk about that. GS: Well, I think that that's fine. I mean, I didn't vote. I could have voted but I elected not to because I'm nonpartisan. I'm serving the country. Now, I know people would say, 8 "Well, you know, it's your duty to vote." Yeah, but when I -- the more senior I became -- first of all, I was overseas 17 years out of 36. In spite of what everybody says, getting absentee ballots to some of the places I was -- give me a break. It's not going to happen. You know, all the paperwork; who are you? What do you mean? Who? It wasn't worth it. Then, the more senior I became, it just became -- to me, it didn't make any difference. I was not going to be known as a Democrat or a Republican or anything. I didn't want to be known as anything other than as a soldier. But, I understand very clearly. There is a distinction between citizen soldier and soldier citizen. I always felt I was a citizen first. SY: What's that distinction? GS: Well, the distinction to me was that when I was retired that it was not -- I knew -- I always knew that I would leave the Army some day and that I would do something. Well, it just so happens so when it came, it came. I mean, I knew I was so I got a job. It just so happens that the job I ultimately have is related to the Army. SY: When you were here at Norwich and you were struggling just like any kid struggles, what were you struggling with? What were your ambitions? What were your visions? GS: I didn't know. I didn't know. I told somebody last night that, you know, one of my friends -- he's still a close friend of mine; like I talk to him once a week, anyway. He said to me -- I don't know whether I was a junior or a senior, but he said, "Well, what do you want to do?" I said, "Well, maybe," I think I answered him, "Well, maybe, I'll go in the Army," or maybe at that time I was writing a column for the newspaper for -- SY: The Guidon. GS: -- the Guidon. Sully's -- it was called Sully's Scratchings. I said, "Maybe, I'll get into the newspaper business or something, become a columnist or whatever." I mean, that seemed like a good idea at the time, you know. Whether I could have done it or not, I don't know but I thought it. Well, as it turned out, you know, as it turned out, it turned out. I found what I really liked. SY: When was the moment that you realized you had this passion? GS: In summer camp -- ROTC summer camp. SY: What -- GS: Went to Fort Knox. Well, I was very -- I found it very attractive what -- the kind of people I met there, the noncommissioned officers who were teaching the courses. Officers were sort of distant to cadets. It was the NCOs and I found that relationship in keeping with what I had done during the summer, working. I worked construction jobs and so forth and so on. I liked that kind of stuff, being outside and most of them were men who were doing labor and building things and making things. So, I think I found that attractive. SY: It seemed honest to you? GS: Well, it was honest. Yeah, it was an honest way of making a living, you know, but I knew I didn't want to do it for the rest of my life but -- and I liked that relationship. So, anyway, one thing led to another and I became a commissioned officer and I didn't want to stay a reservist because I thought that being a reservist was -- I mean, I didn't have anything against being a reserve officer but it was just I wanted to be a part of the -- in it, committed to being a soldier. Immediately upon becoming a regular Army officer, I was sent to Korea, and that's where I really, really knew that I was -- had chosen correctly.9 SY: Was there a moment when you knew it? GS: Well, I knew it as soon as I got there because it was -- first of all, the country, at that time -- it was in June of 1961. I had been at Fort Hood for a while but that was sort of kind of getting my feet on the ground. It was very, very under-resourced units and there was not -- it was not fulfilling at all. When I arrived in Korea, we were full up. We were up close to the DMZ. It was real soldiering, and that's where I learned how much I liked it. SY: Did you also learn that you were good at it? Was there a moment when you were like, oh, hey, I'm good at this? GS: No. I felt I was -- probably felt at that time I was a good platoon leader and company commander and I had a staff job for a while. Then, I volunteered to go to Vietnam and you can see a picture of me in that passport I gave yesterday. So, I went from Korea to Vietnam. Some people say, "Well, you know, why?" I said, "Because that's what I thought soldiers did." The chief of staff of the Army asked for volunteers and I thought that's what you do. You volunteer to go to war. That's what I was -- a professional soldier. So, I did that for 18 months and then I came back home. I didn't meet my wife. I knew my wife. I had gone to grammar --I'd gone -- I knew her. We grew up in the same town so I knew who she was as a kid. Then, we were in the same junior high school class. You know, like I'd known her forever. I knew her forever. Then, I went to public school, public high school. I blew that. My mother said, "This is not going to work out," so I wound up at what we called then a country day school -- a private school but not a live-in school. Gay was my classmate in summer school because she couldn't do math either and neither could I so I had to take a summer course. SY: Did you need more structure? Is that what happened with you and public school? GS: Yeah, it's probably the same thing. I mean, it was the same thing that you saw here. I had -- I'm the kind of guy that they would say, "Well, he has lots of talent but he doesn't apply himself because he's with his buddies and doing other things while he should be studying or something else." SY: You were like that at Norwich, too? GS: The same thing. It was the same thing. SY: What were you doing? GS: Well, I was working in the mess hall, selling sandwiches at night to make a couple of bucks for my buddy, actually, my buddy who I memorialized a building for him last week. I was a eulogist at his funeral. One of the things that's sort of fallen to me, you know, whatever, it's the sad kind of stuff is being the eulogist at two -- Jack (Dirgins?) who I came up here as a senior in high school when we both decided to come here. I went to high school with him and Norwich with him, and I'm the godfather of one of his children and I buried him. That's -- you know, that's hard duty -- SY: Yeah, it is. GS: -- because they're my buddies. I also -- my wife told me the day she died -- she said -- she gave me instructions. She said, "I want you to speak at my funeral service, not as an army general, as my husband." SY: Those are good instructions. GS: That's different. I said, "Are you sure?" She said, "I'm very sure." SY: What did she mean?10 GS: She meant she didn't want me to give some Army kind of speech. She wanted me to tell them what kind of a person she was. SY: She wanted you to be vulnerable. GS: Yeah, well, sure, sure. SY: It sounds like she was a good counterbalance. GS: She was a great counterbalance and a huge part of my life. SY: Yeah, 49 years? GS: Forty-nine years. One night she told me -- I was -- oh, I had something going on professionally and so forth and she was -- she said, "Look," we were in the kitchen, just the two of us. I think all the kids had gone by then. She said, "Look, I'm going to bed. I'm tired of listening to you, you know, sort of fuming around and stumbling around." She said, "Just remember this -- suck it up. It's a test." That was it. "Suck it up. It's a test," and it was and she was right, and how I handled it was a test and it all worked out. When I woke up the morning of her funeral and I had been through about eight drafts of what I was going to say, I had papers and notes all over the place. I laid in bed and I said to myself, "What would Gay have said?" She would have said, "Suck it up. It's a test." SY: That's beautiful. GS: Life's a test. I don't know whether I passed or not. It's a test. SY: Do you have doubts? GS: I have no doubts. That's false modesty. That's really not me. SY: So, you do think you passed. GS: I passed. (laughter) I passed. SY: All right! GS: OK? SY: OK. GS: I don't want Norwich -- anybody at Norwich University to think I think I failed. SY: Yeah. What are you proudest of? GS: I'm proud to say I'm a Norwich University graduate. I'm proud to say I was an American soldier and I don't care who knows it. SY: Proud of being a good husband? GS: I'm proud of being a good husband, and a good father, and a good grandfather. I'm proud of all of it. Was I as good a father as I could have been? Probably not. SY: Is anyone? GS: I don't know. I'm sure everybody has their doubts about that. Being a parent never ends -- never ends -- and being a grandfather is a joy. SY: Did you have to be away from them a lot? GS: Well, my children, I did, yes. My wife and I actually raised one of our grandchildren and that was the joy, extra joy, in our life. He's now a junior in college and doing pretty good. He's a good boy, thanks to his grandmother and me to some extent. Anyway, so that's what I wanted you to know, okay? SY: OK.11 GS: Now, I could show you some things in there which are more meaningful than others to tell that story but personally, frankly, I don't think that story holds. I don't think that what's in there -- I'm not arguing for any more space. You could probably do less and do the same thing. You've got some stuff. I mean, I can tell stories about almost everything you've got and how it all fits. SY: But, it sounds like, yeah, you have a slightly different narrative, so what -- GS: I have a different narrative than what a historian would pick out. SY: So, what would your narrative be? GS: Well, I think my narrative would be I can take you right in there right now and start -- and show you stuff that supports what I just told you. SY: All right. Do you want me to take the microphone and we can go in there? END OF AUDIO FILE
Why "aporophobia"—rejection of the poor—is one of the most serious problems facing the world today, and how we can fight itIn this revelatory book, acclaimed political philosopher Adela Cortina makes an unprecedented assertion: the biggest problem facing the world today is the rejection of poor people. Because we can't recognize something we can't name, she proposes the term "aporophobia" for the pervasive exclusion, stigmatization, and humiliation of the poor, which cuts across xenophobia, racism, antisemitism, and other prejudices. Passionate and powerful, Aporophobia examines where this nearly invisible daily attack on poor people comes from, why it is so harmful, and how we can fight it.Aporophobia traces this universal prejudice's neurological and social origins and its wide-ranging, pernicious consequences, from unnoticed hate crimes to aporophobia's threat to democracy. It sheds new light on today's rampant anti-immigrant feeling, which Cortina argues is better understood as aporophobia than xenophobia. We reject migrants not because of their origin, race, or ethnicity but because they seem to bring problems while offering nothing of value. And this is unforgivable in societies that enshrine economic exchange as the supreme value while forgetting that we can't create communities worth living in without dignity, generosity, and compassion for all. Yet there is hope, and Cortina explains how we can overcome the moral, social, and political disaster of aporophobia through education and democratic institutions, and how poverty itself can be eradicated if we choose.In a world of migrant crises and economic inequality, Aporophobia is essential for understanding and confronting one of the most serious problems of the twenty-first century
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
This open access book questions the stereotype depicting all Gulf (GCC) economies as not sustainable, and starts a critical discussion of what these economies and polities should do to guarantee themselves a relatively stable future. Volatile international oil markets and the acceleration of the energy transition has challenged the notion that oil revenues are sufficient to sustain oil economies in the near to medium term. But what is the meaning of economic sustainability? The book discusses the multiple dimensions of the concept: economic diversification, continuing value of resources, taxation and fiscal development, labor market sustainability, sustainable income distribution, environmental sustainability, political order (democracy or authoritarianism) and sustainability, regional integration. The overarching message in this book is that we should move on from the simplistic branding of the Gulf economies as unsustainable and tackle the details of which adaptations they might need to undertake.
The Country Opinion Survey in Tajikistan assists the World Bank Group (WBG) in gaining a better understanding of how stakeholders in Tajikistan perceive the WBG. It provides the WBG with systematic feedback from national and local governments, multilateral/bilateral agencies, media, academia, the private sector, and civil society in Tajikistan on 1) their views regarding the general environment in Tajikistan; 2) their overall attitudes toward the WBG in Tajikistan; 3) overall impressions of the WBG's effectiveness and results, knowledge work and activities, and communication and information sharing in Tajikistan; and 4) their perceptions of the WBG's future role in Tajikistan.
Public-private dialogue (PPD) is highly necessary in fragile and conflict-affected situations (FCS) to fill the gap resulting from the lack of legitimate institutions, to help create transparency and trust among stakeholders, and to identify the need for reforms and interventions that can improve the business environment and attract investment. Moreover, creating a platform for PPD can provide a useful starting point for private sector development in FCS for projects in key sectors, such as agribusiness and extractives, where PPD can help build links between large-scale investments and the local economy. To support PPD projects in FCS, the World Bank Group has conducted a survey of 27 task team leaders and other program staff members with experiences from 30 FCS countries. The survey was followed by in-depth interviews with 13 key staff members who have experience from selected countries. By conducting in-depth interviews, the Bank Group aimed to capture important experiences and lessons learned, including a description of challenges, useful tools and methods, and do s and don ts. The results of PPD are produced by the reforms it initiates and also the process it implements. In FCS, the peacebuilding and conflict-mitigating results are difficult to capture. However, the stakeholders that benefit from the results highly value them. This study will inform the design of guidelines intended for PPD project managers operating in FCS environments.
Le premier tome de la synthèse intitulée "Le développement agricole au Sahel" présente le contexte de la production et les enjeux sociaux, techniques et économiques pour le développement des activités agricoles. L'image qui prévaut pour le Sahel est celle d'une grande précarité des conditions de production, liée aux fortes incertitudes climatiques, et d'un potentiel de production limité. Ce constat apparaît trop réducteur. Aussi, chaque contribution souligne-t-elle la diversité des situations locales et la nécessaire prise en compte de leurs spécificités. En outre, malgré les évolutions défavorables des conditions physiques et économiques de leur environnement, les sociétés d'agriculteurs et de pasteurs ont démontré leurs capacités à innover. Ils modifient les systèmes techniques de production et développent des stratégies souvent défensives, dominées par la sauvegarde du court terme, mais qui peuvent se révéler offensives dès qu'existent des opportunités économiques
Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Horanchi-2 Microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and the physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 389 ha in Yadgir taluk & district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought-prone with an average annual rainfall of 866 mm, of which about 652 mm is received during south-west monsoon, 138 mm during north-east and the remaining 76 mm during the rest of the year. An area of 341 ha in the microwatershed is covered by soils, about 25 ha covered by rock outcrops and 23 ha by others (water body). The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below. The soils belong to 10 soil series and 12 soil phases (management units) and 7 land management units. The length of crop growing period is about 120-150 days starting from 1st week of June to 4th week of October. From the master soil map, several interpretative and thematic maps like land capability, soil depth, surface soil texture, soil gravelliness, available water capacity, soil slope and soil erosion were generated. Soil fertility status maps for macro and micronutrients were generated based on the surface soil samples collected at every 320 m grid interval. Land suitability for growing 29 major agricultural and horticultural crops was assessed and maps showing the degree of suitability along with constraints were generated. An area about 341 ha (88%) in the microwatershed is suitable for agriculture. About 49 per cent area of the microwatershed has soils that are deep to very deep (100 - >150 cm) 16 per cent soils are moderately deep (75-100) whereas 6 per cent soils are moderately shallow (50 -75 cm), 17 per cent soils are shallow (25 - 50 cm) in the microwatershed. About 2 per cent area in the microwatershed has sandy soils, 38 percent soils are loamy and 48 per cent clayey soils at the surface. Maximum area of about 71 percent soils are non gravelly (200 mm/m) in available water capacity, 10 percent soils are medium (51-100), 12 per cent soils are low (51-100 mm/m) and 17 per cent area is very low (0.75%) in organic carbon content. About 80 percent is medium (23-57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus and 8 percent soils are high (>57 kg/ha) in available phosphorus. Entire cultivated area of the microwatershed is medium (145-337kg/ha) in available potassium. Entire cultivated area of the microwatershed is medium (10-20ppm) in available sulphur. Available boron is low (4.5ppm) in an area of about 82 percent and deficient (<4.5ppm) is 6 per cent in the microwatershed. Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils of the microwatershed. Available zinc is deficient (<0.6 ppm) in the entire cultivated area of the microwatershed The land suitability for 29 major crops grown in the microwatershed were assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (S1) and moderately suitable (S2) are given below. It is however to be noted that a given soil may be suitable for various crops but what specific crop to be grown may be decided by the farmer looking to his capacity to invest on various inputs, marketing infrastructure, market price and finally the demand and supply position. Land suitability for various crops in the Microwatershed Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Sorghum 114(29) 147(38) Guava - 50(13) Maize - 251(65) Sapota - 50(13) Bajra - 261(67) Pomegranate - 238(61) Groundnut - 50(13) Musambi 188(48) 50(13) Sunflower 114(29) 124(32) Lime 188(48) 50(13) Redgram - 238(61) Amla - 261(67) Bengal gram 188(48) 23(6) Cashew - - Cotton 114(29) 97(25) Jackfruit - 50(13) Chilli - 261(67) Jamun - 188(48) Tomato - 261(67) Custard apple 188(48) 73(18) Brinjal 16(4) 245(63) Tamarind - 188(48) Onion - 228(59) Mulberry - 50(13) Bhendi 90(23) 171(44) Marigold - 261(67) Drumstick - 238(61) Chrysanthemum - 261(67) Mango - 16(4) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fiber and horticulture crops. Maintaining soil-health is vital to crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested to these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc. Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required. As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. This would help in not only supplementing the farm income but also provide fodder and fuel to generate lot of biomass which would help in maintaining an ecological balance and also contribute to mitigating the climate change. The data on households sampled for socio economic survey indicated that 34 farmers were sampled in Horanchi-2 micro-watershed among them 4 (11.76 %) were landless, 13 (38.24 %) were marginal farmers, 11 (32.35 %) were small farmers, 5 (14.71 %) were semi medium farmers and 1 (2.94 %) were medium farmers. The data indicated that there were 117 (56.80 %) men and 89 (43.20 %) women among the sampled households. The average family size of landless farmers' was 4.25, marginal farmers' was 5.15, small farmers' was 7.27, semi medium farmers' was 7.4 and medium farmers' was 5. The data indicated that, 55 (26.70 %) people were in 0-15 years of age, 103 (50 %) were in 16-35 years of age, 36 (17.48 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 12 (5.83 %) were above 61 years of age. The results indicated that Horanchi-2had 45.63 per cent illiterates, 0.49 per cent Functional Literate, 23.30 per cent of them had primary school, 3.88 per cent of them had middle school, 12.62 per cent of them had high school education, 3.40 per cent of them had PUC, 0.49 per cent of them had Diploma and ITI, 2.43 per cent of them had Degree education and 1.94 per cent of them had Masters education. The results indicate that, 88.24 per cent of household heads were practicing agriculture, 8.82 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labourers and 2.94 cent of the household heads were General labourers. The results indicate that agriculture was the major occupation for 55.83 per cent of the household members, 67.66 per cent were agricultural labourers, 1.94 per cent were in general labour, 2.43 per cent were private service, 22.82 per cent were students, 5.83 per cent were housewives and 5.83 per cent were children. The results show that, 100 per cent of the population in the micro watershed has not participated in any local institutions. The results indicate that 20.59 per cent of the households possess Thatched house, 44.12 per cent of the households possess Katcha house and 32.35 per cent of them possess Pucca/RCC house. The results show that 70.59 per cent of the households possess TV, 50 per cent of the households possess mixer/grinder, 2.94 per cent of the households possess bicycle, Computer/Laptop and Landline Phone, 47.06 per cent of the households possess motor cycle, 5.88 per cent of the households possess Auto, 2.94 per cent of the households possess Tempo and 94.12 per cent of the households possess mobile phones. The results show that the average value of television was Rs. 5,625, mixer/grinder was Rs. 2,250, Bicycle was Rs. 3,000, motor cycle was Rs. 53,312, Landline Phone was Rs. 5,000, Computer/Laptop was Rs. 35,000 and mobile phone was Rs. 2,360. 2 About 29.41 per cent of the households possess Bullock Cart, 44.12 per cent of the households possess plough, 11.76 per cent of the households possess Power Tiller, 5.88 per cent of them possess Tractor, Sprayer, Sprinkler and Thresher, 8.82 per cent of them possess Harvester and 52.94 per cent of them possess weeder. The results show that the average value of bullock cart was Rs. 14,200, plough was Rs. 2,153, Power Tiller was Rs. 78,250, Tractor was Rs. 650,000, sprayer was Rs. 4,000, sprinkler was Rs. 5,500, Harvester was Rs. 76, Thresher was Rs. 100 and the average value of weeder was Rs. 202. The results indicate that, 32.35 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 23.53 per cent of the households possess local cow, 2.94 per cent of the households possess Crossbred cow, 8.82 per cent of the households possess Goat and 5.88 per cent of the households possess Poultry birds. The results indicate that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 1.73, average own labour (women) available was 1.47, average hired labour (men) available was 9.37 and average hired labour (women) available was 9.63. In case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.38, average own labour (women) was 1.23, average hired labour (men) was 8.69 and average hired labour (women) available was 8.69. In case of small farmers, average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 1.82, average hired labour (men) was 7.91 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.73. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 2, average own labour (women) was 1.40, average hired labour (men) was 14.20 and average hired labour (women) available was 15.20. In case of medium farmers, average own labour men available was 2 and average own labour (women) was 1, average hired labour (men) was 10 and average hired labour (women) available was 9.63. The results indicate that, 91.18 per cent of the households opined that the hired labour was adequate. The results indicate that, 3.85 per cent of the households have migrated in the microwatershed. The results indicate that, the average distance of migrated households was 2800 kms and average duration was for 4 months. The results indicate that, 100 per cent of the households opined that Job/wage/work was the main purpose of migration. The results indicate that, households of the Horanchi-2 micro-watershed possess 22.94 ha (64.46 %) of dry land, 9.41 ha (26.44 %) of irrigated land and 3.24 ha (9.10 %) of Permanent Fallow land. Marginal farmers possess 7.25 ha (92.94 %) of dry land and 0.55 ha (7.06 %) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 12.41 ha (83.22 %) of dry land and 2.50 ha (16.78 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 0.45 ha (6.60 %) of dry land and 6.36 ha (93.40 %) of irrigated land. 3 Medium farmers possess 2.83 ha (46.67 %) and 3.24 ha (53.33 %) of Permanent Fallow land. The results indicate that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 374,770.64, the average value of irrigated land was Rs. 339,956.99 and the average value of Permanent Fallow land was Rs. 247,000. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 602,092.13 for dry land and the average land value was Rs. 908,088.23 for Irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 306,131.77 for dry land and Rs. 859,130.45 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 445,045.04 for dry land and Rs. 298,726.93 for irrigated land. In case of medium farmers, the average land value was Rs. 352,857.14 for dry land. The results indicate that, there were 1 De-functioning and 8 functioning bore wells in the micro watershed. The results indicate that, there were 1 functioning open wells in the micro watershed. The results indicate that, bore well was the major irrigation source in the micro water shed for 23.53 per cent of the farmers and Open Well was the irrigation source in the micro water shed for 5.88 per cent of the farmers. The results indicate that, the depth of bore well was found to be 15.65 meters and the depth of open well was found to be 2.15 meters. The results indicate that, marginal, small and semi medium farmers had an irrigated area of 1.08 ha, 4.92 ha and 4.25 ha respectively. The results indicate that, farmers have grown cotton (4.19 ha), green gram (5.88 ha), groundnut (2.23 ha), Paddy (4.72 ha), red gram (10.19 ha) and sorghum (1.21 ha). Marginal farmers have grown red gram, paddy, cotton and green gram. Small farmers have grown cotton, groundnut, sorghum, red gram, green gram and paddy. Semi medium farmers have grown cotton, red gram, paddy and groundnut. Medium farmers have grown red gram and sorghum. The results indicate that, the cropping intensity in Horanchi-2 micro-watershed was found to be 86.14 per cent. The results indicate that, 67.65 per cent of the households have bank account and 2.94 per cent of the households have savings. The results indicate that, 64.71 per cent of the households have availed credit from different sources. The results indicate that, the total cost of cultivation for Cotton was Rs. 229722.04. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 109333.82. The net income from Cotton cultivation was Rs. -120388.22. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1: 0.48. The results indicate that, the total cost of cultivation for green gram was Rs. 39928.01. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 47145.61. The net 4 income from green gram cultivation was Rs. 7217.60. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1: 1.18. The results indicate that, the total cost of cultivation for groundnut was Rs. 55704.62. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 68428.15. The net income from groundnut cultivation was Rs. 12723.53. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1: 1.23. The results indicate that, the total cost of cultivation for Red gram was Rs. 34552.12. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 48332.75. The net income from Red gram cultivation was Rs. 13780.63. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1: 1.4. The results indicate that, the total cost of cultivation for Sorghum was Rs. 50898.75. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 59280. The net income from Sorghum cultivation was Rs. 8381.25. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1: 1.16. The results indicate that, 29.41 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 20.59 per cent of the households opined that green fodder was adequate. The results indicate that the annual gross income was Rs. 114,889 for for marginal farmers, for small farmers it was Rs. 149,763.64, semi medium farmers it was Rs. 119,000 and medium farmers it was Rs. 290,000. The results indicate that the average annual expenditure is Rs. 441,909.32. For marginal farmers it was Rs. 11,598.62, for small farmers it was Rs. 17,066.12, for semi medium farmers it was Rs. 8,680 and medium farmers it was Rs. 60,000. The results indicate that, households have planted 64 Neem, 5 Acacia, 16 Banyan and 1 tamarind trees in their field. The results indicated that, households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 4,647.06 for land development, households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 705.88 for Irrigation facility, households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 2,323.53 for improved crop production and households have an average investment capacity of Rs. 617.65 improved livestock management. The results indicated that Loan from bank was the source of additional investment for 38.24 per cent for land development, 11.76 per cent for irrigation facility, 35.29 per cent for improved crop production and 11.76 per cent for improved livestock management. Own funds was the source of additional investment for 2.94 per cent for land development. The results indicated that, cotton was sold to the extent of 84.41 per cent, Green gram was sold to the extent of 98.91 per cent, Groundnut was sold to the extent of 82.61 per cent, Paddy was sold to the extent of 44.05 per cent, Red gram was sold to the extent of 100 per cent and sorghum to the extent of 75 per cent. 5 The results indicated that, about 100 per cent of the farmers sold their produce to local/village merchants. The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have used tractor as a mode of transportation. The results indicated that, 82.35 per cent of the households have experienced soil and water erosion problems in the farm. The results indicated that, 88.24 per cent have shown interest in soil test. The results indicated that, 97.06 per cent of the households used firewood as a source of fuel and 2.94 per cent of the households used LPG as a source of fuel. The results indicated that, piped supply was the major source of drinking water for 97.06 per cent of the households in the micro watershed and Bore Well was the major source of drinking water for 2.94 per cent of the households in the micro watershed. The results indicated that, Electricity was the major source of light for 100 per cent of the households in micro watershed. The results indicated that, 29.41 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet facility. The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL cards. The results indicated that, 94.12 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme. The results indicated that, cereals and Pulses were adequate for 100 per cent of the households, Oilseed were adequate for 94.12 per cent of the households, Vegetables were adequate for 79.41 per cent, Egg were adequate for 8.82 per cent, Fruits were adequate for 2.94 per cent and Milk and were adequate for 82.35 per cent. The results indicated that, cereals were inadequate for 29.41 per cent of the households, Pulses were inadequate for 20.59 per cent of the households, oilseeds were inadequate for 5.88 per cent, vegetables and milk were inadequate for 17.65 per cent, fruits were inadequate for 97.06 per cent, Egg were inadequate for 91.18 per cent of the households and Meat was inadequate for 100 per cent of the households. The results indicated that, lower fertility status of the soil and Wild animal menace on farm field were the constraint experienced by 88.24 per cent of the households, frequent incidence of pest and diseases (82.35 %), High cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals, Lack of marketing facilities in the area and High rate of interest on credit (85.29 %), Inadequacy of irrigation water (14.71 %), Low price for the agricultural commodities (76.47 %), Inadequate extension services (17.65 %) and Lack of transport for safe transport of the Agril produce to the market (79.41 %), Less rainfall (2.94 %) and Source of Agri-technology information(Newspaper/TV/Mobile) (8.82 %). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project
